Frank Gardner
Safety correspondent
Getty Images
German soldiers deployed two air defense units in Poland in January to protect the supply routes to Ukraine – Germany was the main weapon donor in Europe
What is happening today, here in Berlin, will have an impact on the whole future of the defense of Europe and its continuous support for Ukraine.
The German Parliament, the Bundestag, votes on the opportunity to withdraw defense expenses. This could open the way to a massive uprising of military investment, just as Russia makes gains in Ukraine and Washington notes that Europe can no longer rely on American protection.
“This vote in the Bundestag is absolutely crucial,” said Professor Monika Schnitzer, who chairs the German Council for Economic Experts.
“After the Munich security conference, then the Row Trump-Zelensky, Europe called.
“The prospects for European defense expenditure are based for developments in Germany, as a holder of the largest defense budget in the region,” said Dr. Fenella McGgerty, principal researcher for the defense economy at the International Institute of Strategic Studies based in London.
Defense expenses in Germany increased 23.2% last year, contributing to a record increase of 11.7% of European defense expenses.
“The remarkable initiatives announced in Germany are essential to allow additional growth,” adds Dr. McGgerty.
“Without them, any progress made to strengthen the military capacities of Germany may have blocked.”
Reuters
The future probable chancellor of Germany, Friedrich Merz, uses the dying days of the current parliament to modify the budgetary rules
The new German Chancellor, Friedrich Merz, is in a race against time.
The new parliament meets on March 25 and everyone is not in favor of all this money spent, especially for the defense.
The far -right AFD party and the far left linke have judged to oppose it. Voting needs two thirds in favor to pass, so Merz has a better chance that this happens today, under the (old) existing parliament. It must then be approved by the German upper room.
Meanwhile, Europe is still reconciled with the shock of announcements from the Trump administration.
During the Munich security conference last month, I watched the open-listening delegates listening to the shared attack by the American vice-president JD Vance against European policies against migration and freedom of expression.
This was preceded for days earlier by the US Secretary for Defense, Pete Hegseth, telling NATO members that the 80 -year defensive umbrella in Europe should no longer be taken for granted.
The defense strategists in Europe already predict the unthinkable: a semi-victory Russia achieving gains in Ukraine, then rebuilding its army and threatening the East NATO members, such as the Baltic States, within three years or less.
This, at a time when American commitment to the defense of Europe seems extremely fragile. President Trump is invited by some in his circle to withdraw American troops from Europe and even to completely withdraw from NATO.
Historical prudence
We are talking about France extending its national nuclear deterrence to cover other European nations.
Meanwhile, most European governments are under pressure to increase defense spending after years of cuts.
The British army has now reduced its smallest size since the Napoleonic wars, over 200 years ago, and experts predict that there would be a lack of ammunition within two weeks of the fight against a large -scale conventional war in Europe.
Reuters
The German rheinmetall produces 155 mm artillery shells, but the United States has provided 82% of the Ukraine belly ammunition
Germany has long been cautious about defense expenses, not only for historical reasons dating from 1945, but also because of the 2009 -world debt crisis.
Which brings us back to today’s crucial vote in the Bundestag. It is not only a matter of defense. A game is to release 500 billion euros (420 billion pounds sterling) for German infrastructure – fix things like bridges and roads, but also to pay for climate change measures, which the Green Party insisted on.
The other party consists in eliminating restrictions on the constitution on the loan which could, in theory, release billions of euros unlimited for defense expenses, both for the armed forces of Germany and for a pan -European defense fund. On March 4, the president of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen announced plans for a defense fund of 800 billion euros called the Rearm Europe Fund.
The proposal which was voted in Berlin is that all defense expenses which represent more than 1% of German GDP (national wealth) would no longer be subject to a loan limit. So far, this debt ceiling has been set at 0.35 pct of GDP.
Other countries will closely monitor to see if this proposal passes. If this is not the case, the European Commission’s “Rear Europe” project could be trembling.
EPA
If Russia is semi-victory in Ukraine, NATO fears attacks against its members of the East in three years
The challenge today for the security of Europe is a blow. If the United States has no backs, or at the very least cannot be invoked to come to the defense of Europe, when the continent must do to fill the void?
Let’s start with the figures. According to the Kiel Institute, which meticulously follows these things, Europe spends only 0.1% of its wealth to help defend Ukraine, while the United States spent 0.15%.
“This means”, explains Giuseppe Irto of the Kiel Institute, “that if Europe wants to compensate for the deficit, it must double its contribution to 0.21%.”
But it doesn’t matter what’s going on in Berlin today, it’s not just a matter of money.
Many of the most sought after weapons in Ukraine’s armory have come from the United States, such as Patriot air defense and long-range artillery systems like Himars. The Kiel Institute puts the proportion of the artillery of Ukrainian rockets at 86% of the United States, with 82% of its belt munitions which are also from the United States.
Then there is the whole question of the help of American intelligence for kyiv, largely derived from satellites and geospatial imagery. If Washington had to constantly deactivate the Ukrainian forces may be partially blinded.
If the nuclear arsenal of America is removed from the equation, there is a massive disparity between the 5,000 warheads of Russia and the combined total of nuclear weapons of Great Britain and France which represent less than a tenth of this. But that always leaves theoretically enough to act as a nuclear deterrence.
Change of culture
Regarding “conventional”, that is to say. Non -nuclear weapons, the heads of Western defense like to say that NATO’s combined forces are greater than those of Russia.
Perhaps, but if there is a blatant lesson to get out of the war of Ukraine, it is that the “mass” is important. The Russian army can be of poor quality, but President Putin has been able to throw such a large number of men, drones, shells and missiles with Ukraine’s front lines that the Russians are progressing inexorably, although slowly and at a huge cost.
It should not surprise. Moscow put its economy on a war base some time ago. He appointed an economist such as his Minister of Defense and has resumed many of his factories to produce large amounts of ammunition, in particular explosive point drones.
EPA
Ukrainian soldiers have been trained in several European countries, including Germany
While many European nations have dragged their feet to increase defense spending above 2% of NATO’s mandatory GDP, Russia is closer to 7%. About 40% of Russia’s national budget is spent on defense.
Europe therefore has a lot of catch -up to be done if it even wants to get closer to its defense and safety.
“If the vote is adopted, it will be important for Germany and for Europe,” said Ed Arnold, principal researcher for European security at the Royal United Revines Institute’s reflection group.
“This will establish a precedent and allow others to follow … However, three years after the invasion of Ukraine, the case of Germany is a reminder that more money for defense is necessary but not sufficient.
“Europe needs defense and security leaders who are able to sail in a Euro-Atlantic security environment quickly. Cultural, rather than financial reform, would be the most precious for Europe at the moment.”
