Session moderated by Luis Simón, Director of the Brussels Office at the Real Instituto Elcano
Speaker: Josep Borrell, President of CIDOB
Luis Simón opened the session by highlighting the imperative to address European defense from both strategic and industrial angles. He framed the discussion within a turbulent geopolitical context, organized into three sections: the role of the U.S. and NATO, the nature of the Russian threat and the future of Ukraine, and the EU’s defense policy. He emphasized that, while European defense depends on European decisions, U.S. commitment to NATO and Russian pressure will shape its direction.
U.S. and NATO Role
Josep Borrell began by outlining Europe’s main strategic and institutional challenges. He noted ongoing uncertainty about the future U.S. role in NATO, with "scenarios ranging from bad to barely tolerable." He warned Europe must prepare for a NATO reset or an eventual American withdrawal, as the U.S. focuses on the Pacific and its southern border. Replacing U.S. forces would require Europe to equip 50 brigades, double troop numbers, and increase defense spending by €250 billion annually – a costly, yet necessary outcome.
He cautioned the worst-case scenario being a U.S.–Russia alliance, deeply harmful to Europe. He underlined how developments in Russia and Ukraine are central, stating Ukraine "is Europe's frontline" and a fallen Ukraine "would drag us down."
Europe’s Defense Capability
When asked whether Europe could respond if the U.S. withdraws support, Borrell admitted Europe’s defense industry is structurally weak. “We promised U.S. 1 million 155mm shells to Ukraine and couldn’t deliver due to lack of capacity,” he said. “We even lack gunpowder and rely on China.” He explained the European defense complex has been underused due to low demand, making it currently difficult to double EU military aid to Ukraine to replace the U.S.
Regarding institutions, he insisted defense is an exclusive national domain: “The European Commission has no authority to mandate defense spending—it only oversees defense industry matters.” Given unanimity is impossible, he suggested that if France and Germany wish to create pan-European defense capabilities, they must do so through an intergovernmental treaty akin to the European Stability Mechanism.
NATO Presence and a European Voice
In audience Q&A, he lamented that the EU has only observer status and no voice in NATO. He proposed a “European pillar within NATO” – interoperable forces able to act if Washington reduces its presence. “If Europe wants to spend €650 billion on defense, it must be done coordinately; otherwise it's wasted,” he said.
Addressing U.S.–China rivalry, Borrell stressed the need to cooperate with Beijing: “No big problem can be solved without China.” However, he warned escalation in the Pacific could further dilute U.S. commitment to Europe.
Conclusion
In a realistic and critical tone, Borrell argued “the challenge is not to spend more, but to spend better and together” for European defense. He called on leaders to move beyond “institutional bla‑bla” and act with decisive strategic vision.
