Can Europe save itself without the US?

Can Europe save itself without the US?

The problems with defense of Europe are complex. Europe not wanting to defend itself is only one of them.

Susan Quinn for American Thinker

Europe has been taking a lot of flak in the last two months in the midst of the Iran War, raising the question of whether its members are capable of or interested in militarily defending themselves.

An example is a serious conflict that arose recently when President Trump asked the Europeans to help the U.S. open the Strait of Hormuz.  The Strait has been mostly closed to traffic by the Iranians, and Trump insists that the waterway should be an open and free passageway.  Iran disagrees and wants sovereignty over it.  The U.S. doesn’t access the Strait very often, but Europe does.  Unfortunately, European states refuse to engage their militaries to keep the Strait open.  To make matters worse, those countries where U.S. bases are established won’t allow the U.S. to use their territory or air bases.  And Trump is furious at the European countries for their lack of cooperation:

The U.S.A. won’t be there to help you anymore, just like you weren’t there for us. Iran has been, essentially, decimated. The hard part is done. Go get your own oil!

The fact that Iran has developed missiles that can reach the far reaches of Europe should be especially concerning.  But Europe has stood firm.  Although much has been said about the spike in oil prices due to the Strait’s near shutdown, prime minister of the U.K. Keir Starmer insists he won’t get into the fight and that the nation will simply need to bear the escalating prices.  He believes that diplomacy is the best way to resolve these issues.

The problems with defense of Europe are complex.  Only a few nations, primarily France, actually have a military industrial complex.  The U.S. wants Europe to conduct its own fighting but would be happy to provide weapons and armaments, which still creates the mindset of dependency.

Europe has tried to be responsive to these latest demands by developing the ReArm Europe plan under the tutelage of the European Commission.  Eight hundred billion euros will be put aside for defense, as well as additional funding from the E.U.  Additional requirements include ensuring that 65% of items be issued from European companies.

Although this decision sounds optimistic, the pressure from Trump to “buy American” may discourage manufacturing and purchasing within Europe.  In addition, these changes are mostly expected to be made over years, not months, and raise the question of whether Europe will be armed in time.

To understand how complicated it will be to develop missiles alone, imagine this issue:

The United Kingdom’s strategic capability is hampered by the fact that its Trident submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) are manufactured and serviced in the United States. This is a critical point of concern as the United States can stop supporting the UK’s deterrent, thus leaving it vulnerable to leverage. And as the French missiles are incompatible with the UK’s submarines, making a new system for the UK or retrofitting its submarines to use French missiles will require massive political and financial undertaking. Therefore, European nations such as Germany, Poland, and others interested in an indigenous European deterrent must unite to aid the United Kingdom and France politically, financially, and possibly technologically in achieving this goal.

Along with this type of issue, there are questions of who will develop nuclear armaments and who will provide protection to the rest of Europe, how to develop independence from U.S. security protection, the dangers of Russia and China, overreliance on diplomacy to solve conflicts, and a reluctance to engage militarily.

By the time Europe gets its act in gear, it may be too late.

Image: Old Photo Profile via Flickr, CC BY 2.0.