By: Dr Vasko Simoniti
On March 19th, 2025, in Brussels, the President of the European Commission presented a white paper on the future of European defence and a plan for the rearmament of Europe, which is to be carried out by securing a good 800 billion euros over the next four years, until 2030.
The basis for this highly publicised announcement was the Resolution on the White Paper on the Future of European Defence, adopted by the European Parliament a week earlier. The resolution lists reasons for its adoption using almost the entire alphabet and offers 89 points of solutions aimed at – or expected to – eliminate Europe’s current unconvincing defence and security capabilities. How binding these solutions are and whether they are merely recommendations for EU member states is revealed by the first words of each point. The Parliament, which drafted and endorsed the document, expresses its stance using phrases such as: considers, emphasises, wishes to remind, is firmly convinced, strongly condemns, regrets, insists, calls again, expects, warns, proposes, welcomes, condemns, advocates, is concerned, rejects, and cautions. Despite these seemingly resolute words, which allow for interpretative ambiguity, the White Paper on European Defence makes it very clear that Europe must also prepare for “the worst possible scenarios”. Therefore, it must build its own defence and security framework capable of effectively deterring any external threat while also ensuring internal security. Amid political, military, economic, and even cultural uncertainties that present themselves as global challenges for Europe, its priority must be resolving issues in its immediate neighbourhood for its own security. Ukraine, where a devastating war is ongoing, must receive effective and sufficient aid to bring the war to an end and establish a just peace.
After three years of a neglectful attitude toward Ukraine, Europe has “suddenly” realised, to paraphrase a Roman poet, that “a neighbour’s fire is also its concern”. What caused this mental earthquake among European decision-makers, awakening them from the complacent numbness offered by consumer-entertainment programmes in shopping malls and sports stadiums? It was not, as the resolution states, the decade-long calls from the European Parliament and experts to adopt a White Paper on Defence. Rather, it was the recent abrupt decision by the new U.S. president to withdraw military protection for Europe, arguing that Europe has not shown sufficient financial and material commitment to its own security. The new American administration has taken the position that Europe must now take full responsibility for its own fate. Over the past decades, Europe’s image has significantly deteriorated.
- Europe has yielded to the pressure of illegal migration, leading to the near-total permeability of its external borders. Even in the resolution, migration is explicitly mentioned as a security issue in only one point (Point 85).
- Europe has gradually succumbed to moral laxity, with deceptive, corruptive solidarity accelerating the erosion of strict adherence to norms, both institutionally and individually.
- Europe, engrossed in itself and its history, has placed its own image in the showcase of arrogant self-glorification, while in reality, it is slowly losing its will to live.
If we replace the word Europe in these three points with Ancient Rome and adjust the grammatical structure accordingly, we see a parallel with the decline of the Roman Empire some 1,600 years ago. While this comparison has been made many times before, in light of the announcement of the White Paper on European Defence and the plan for Europe’s rearmament by 2030, one can hope that the correct diagnosis has been made – one that will lead to the healing of Europe’s fragility.
