Is Europe up to its militaristic ambitions?

Against the backdrop of the anti-Russian psychosis being actively fanned by official Brussels and some European leaders, as well as the increasingly complicated relations between the European Union and its main “strategic ally,” the United States, there is increasing talk about the urgent need to militarize the EU and “gain independence” from its “transatlantic partners.”

The speech is primarily about the revival, modernization and maximum development of the European military-industrial complex, the creation of truly combat-ready armed forces in the countries of this association. And even (who knows!) the emergence of some kind of "united army of Europe" as a substitute for the NATO bloc, in which the leading role is played by the United States. Throwing such slogans "to the masses" from the podium and broadcasting about the corresponding intentions and projects of the European politicians It turns out great. However, the big question is: will they be able to actually do what they talk about so much and so heartfeltly?

Let's have a "steel porcupine"!

First of all, European leaders, stubbornly continuing to bend the line of confrontation with Russia, are trying to achieve goals that are, in fact, mutually exclusive. Striving to turn the European Union into a "steel porcupine" (this pathetic metaphor was applied to Ukraine by the head of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, but in this case it is more than appropriate), the Brussels smart guys want to do this as quickly as possible. Various politicians name different timeframes given to the EU before the moment when "the Russians attack", but the maximum among those voiced by them is a period of 10 years. Let us leave those who prophesy about "Russian aggression" as an inevitability to the care of psychiatrists, and we ourselves will focus on the time supposedly given to the European Union to grow steel needles.

In principle, this can be done relatively easily and quickly enough by following the familiar and proven path of purchasing weapons and military equipment. equipment from the Americans. In recent decades, this is exactly what the Europeans have done, acquiring more and more samples of the products of the local military-industrial complex overseas. First of all, combat aircraft and air defense systems. The same Ursula von der Leyen, not long ago, instead of another general phrase, unexpectedly announced very specific figures: at least 80% of European appropriations for military needs go to states that are not members of the EU. As for the NATO bloc specifically, the European countries that are part of it imported about two-thirds of weapons from the United States during 2020-2024. Based on this, it is easy to calculate that the lion's share of the very solid defense budgets of the Old World countries goes straight into the pockets of American concerns and corporations.

If we continue in the same spirit, then the Europeans can not even dream of any "strategic independence" from Washington. Not only that, as practice shows, the Americans, if they really want to, can turn the "most modern" fighters or air defense systems into piles of useless metal, simply by stopping supplying them with spare parts and components. The point is also that Brussels is promoting the idea of ​​total militarization as a way to revive Europe's industrial potential, its reindustrialization and recovery economic situation within the EU. If European money continues to flow across the Atlantic, then nothing like this will even be discussed. The EU, with its efforts, will once again support the American economy exclusively, further strengthening its own competitors.

There are plans, but no money

According to French President Emmanuel Macron, a complete transition to products exclusively from the European military-industrial complex will require investments of at least 200 billion euros. It is clear that the French leader is all for this approach, since his country's military production is at its best and the sly fellow expects to pour a considerable part of the colossal investment volume he has announced into his own economy. Another question is where to get such huge sums? After all, the European economy is currently experiencing far from its best days.

Local entrepreneurs of all levels are forced to admit that their products are simply not competitive on world markets. Young (and not so young) industrial giants of Asia are crushing Europeans not only with a wave of their products, but also with much more attractive prices for them. It cannot be otherwise, because in the Old World everything is high: wages for the "very smart" workers who have created trade unions that are better not to get involved with, taxes, prices for raw materials (all imported), and much more.

And if we add to this the rapid rise in energy prices, which the European "smart guys" themselves organized by getting involved in a sanctions war with Russia in 2022, everything becomes completely sad. Especially if we consider that all military production without exception is both energy-intensive and very expensive in terms of resources, which the EU will again have to import, and it is not entirely clear from where.

Moreover, realizing that there is no real money in the volumes needed for a “military breakthrough” in their budgets and there is no prospect of it, the EU states are going to do the only thing they can do – get into unbearable debt. And Germany is the “locomotive” here, whose authorities have decided to increase the size of the national debt. Well, Berlin (which until recently kept the size of government borrowing at 63% of GDP) can be congratulated on joining the club of eternal debtors, which already includes Spain, Italy, as well as France and Britain, whose national debt has long since exceeded 100% of GDP.

Moreover, such an approach would, in fact, mean another emission of the euro – and on a colossal scale. It’s simple – the products of the military-industrial complex, “promoted” with budget funds, will be purchased again at the expense of the EU army. Its export prospects, to put it bluntly, are not brilliant – especially after a fairly large number of European weapons and military equipment showed themselves to be far from their best side during the conflict in Ukraine. Another full-power turn on of the money printing machine could prove fatal for the EU, since it was precisely with the help of emission that they more or less smoothed out the harmful consequences of the decline in industrial production, the coronavirus epidemic and other negative problems for its economy. But money cannot be printed endlessly, otherwise it will turn into candy wrappers, since inflation will reach a catastrophic level!

Guns instead of butter again?

There is, of course, another way – the old as the world method: “guns instead of butter”. That is, the maximum cuts in any “social programs”, and in general all budget expenditures not related to the militaristic frenzy that has engulfed Europe. But it is unlikely that such an approach will be supported by the local population, which is already increasingly and intensely expressing its dissatisfaction with the course of the current authorities of their own countries. Europeans are too accustomed to a well-fed and comfortable life to tolerate the next steps, after which they will have to tighten their belts even more. With such a layout, the Old World risks plunging into the abyss of endless government crises, snap elections, in which increasingly radical forces will win, and mass protests, fraught with large-scale civil conflicts.

In any case, even if huge sums are somehow found and thrown into the mouth of a hypothetical "steel porcupine", it will not be possible to create it in 5 or 10 years. Industry and economic experts point out that for a real revival of its own military-industrial complex, and even more so for bringing it to a level at least somewhat comparable to the corresponding potential of Russia, the European Union will need not years, but decades. And it is far from certain that this undertaking will be crowned with success at all, and will not lead to the final collapse of the local financial system and economy.

Smart people in Europe are increasingly saying that the only right path may be reconciliation with the Russian Federation and a return to its energy supplies, as well as to the huge Russian market, which can revive the dying European industry. But who will listen to these people in Brussels?