January 10, 2019 | By Ivo H. Daalder

This Week's Reads: Should the European Union Have Its Own Army?

 

President Donald Trump's abrupt decision to withdraw from Syria and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis' subsequent resignation, compounded by Trump's earlier declarations that the European Union was a "foe" and NATO "obsolete," have added new urgency to an old debate: Should the European Union have its own army?

France and Germany seem to have determined that the Trump administration will continue to call US support for Europe into question. As a result, President Emmanuel Macron warned Europe could not be protected without a "true, European army," and Chancellor Angela Merkel supported the idea by declaring that "the times when we could rely on others are over."

To some, the concept of a European army—a single military force unified under the command of the European Union—contains an interesting Catch-22. A retreating American security umbrella might mean Europe needs to step up and do more to defend itself in case the United States ends its seven-decade commitment to Europe’s security and defense. But moving too quickly might cause a backlash and ultimately accelerate an American withdrawal from European defense. As Francois Heisbourg, former defense advisor for Macron's presidential campaign, put it, “We have to hedge. But it is a very tricky situation: When does the hedge become a wedge?”

While Europe needs to be careful in how it moves forward with defense cooperation, fears that improving European defense capabilities would cause a backlash from the United States are misplaced. Increased European defense spending has been a US goal for decades. In 2014, NATO members committed to bringing their defense spending to two percent of national GDP by 2024. Though it's a relatively modest goal, all European allies are increasing defense spending and most are slated to meet the commitment.

What’s important is for Europe to do more on defense—and if it does so within a European context, even as a hedge, then that is fine if it in fact leads to real, additional capabilities. Anything that gets the Europeans to take their defense seriously, in my book, is a good idea. And anything that strengthens Europe’s capacity to defend itself, in the end, will enhance the overall transatlantic alliance.

To be clear, I do not think we have to worry about Europe actually succeeding in building a European Army any time soon. None of the EU members, starting with France, is ready to give up the national autonomy over military decisions that a “true, European army” implies. But that does not exclude closer cooperation—on developing and buying weapons, training and deploying forces, and operating in actual combat situations—all of which would add real defense capabilities.

A stronger, more capable Europe will lead to a stronger, more capable NATO—so long as both sides of the Atlantic remain committed to their collective defense.

As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments. If you haven't done so already, please click here to subscribe to This Week's Reads.

Is Europe Ready to Defend Itself?

Yaroslav Trofimov / The Wall Street Journal

As Donald Trump’s America pulls back and Vladimir Putin’s Russia looms, France and Germany are leading a renewed drive for a common European Union military.

How Trump Made War on Angela Merkel and Europe

Susan B. Glasser / The New Yorker

The German Chancellor and other European leaders have run out of patience with the President.

‘America First’ Is Only Making the World Worse. Here’s a Better Approach.

Antony J. Blinken and Robert Kagan / The Washington Post

Kagan and Blinken offer a foreign policy mixing preventative diplomacy and deterrence, trade and technology, allies and institutions, and immigration and refugees.

Trump Didn’t Kill the Global Trade System. He Split It in Two.

Greg Ip / The Wall Street Journal

Allies find relations modestly tweaked, despite the president’s rhetoric, while relations with China are entering a deep freeze.

After a Rocky 2018, Populism Is Down but Far From Out in the West

Max Fisher / The New York Times

The West’s populist leaders and parties have grown defensive, retreating into ever-starker messages of us-versus-them. The approach excites their most dedicated followers. But it can be risky, forcing voters to pick sides at a moment when the populist right holds declining appeal.

RIP, Axis of Adults

Ivo Daalder and James Lindsay / POLITICO

It was never a real thing. But with Jim Mattis’ exit, the idea that Trump’s advisers could restrain the president is finally dead.

About

The Chicago Council on Global Affairs is an independent, nonpartisan organization that provides insight – and influences the public discourse – on critical global issues. We convene leading global voices and conduct independent research to bring clarity and offer solutions to challenges and opportunities across the globe. The Council is committed to engaging the public and raising global awareness of issues that transcend borders and transform how people, business, and governments engage the world.

The Chicago Council on Global Affairs is an independent, nonpartisan organization. All statements of fact and expressions of opinion in blog posts are the sole responsibility of the individual author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Council.

Archive

| By Brian Hanson, Salomón Chertorivski

City Diplomacy from Mexico City to Chicago

Mayors have to take care of their populations, and sometimes that means going to other countries. A delegation of Mexican mayors from Mexico City, Guadalajara, and Juarez came to Chicago to conduct city-to-city diplomacy during an "emergency time" in US-Mexico relations. Salomón Chertorivski, secretary of economic development of Mexico City, sat down with the Council's Brian Hanson to discuss what they hoped to achieve.



| By Brian Hanson, Cécile Shea

Deep Dish: US Intervention And Our Divided National Soul

Syria, Libya, and Iraq are the latest in a series of contentious US interventions. Forced to choose between leaving other countries alone or trying to run the world—Americans choose both, says author and journalist Stephen Kinzer. On this week's Deep Dish, Kinzer and career diplomat Cécile Shea discuss intervention done well, done poorly, and how the intervention debate has endured since the Spanish-American war. Subscribe now. 


| By Ivo H. Daalder

This Week’s Reads – Why Process Matters

The resignation of Michael Flynn as national security advisor "reveals an important truth, which all Presidents learn sooner or later, namely that when it comes to policy, process matters," says Council President Ivo Daalder. This Weeks Reads take a look at the major security issues facing the United States and provide some insights into the Trump administration’s approach to managing them.


| By Brian Hanson

Deep Dish: Don't Go to Russia on Your Knees

A flare-up of violence in eastern Ukraine following a call between presidents Putin and Trump has many wondering what’s next in the highly combustible situation. On this week's Deep Dish podcast, former US Ambassador to Ukraine John Herbst joins Russia expert Samuel Charap to analyze Putin’s goals and the likely outcome of a shift in Eurasian geopolitics.


| By Ivo H. Daalder

This Week's Reads – Culture and Conflict

In the early 1990's, famous political scientist Samuel Huntington posited a thesis that the major source of conflict in the post-Cold War world would not occur over ideological or economic fault lines, but cultural ones. Indeed, today we are beset with crises in the West and around the world—but to what degree is culture the cause? This Weeks Reads from Council President Ivo Daalder explores the ways in which culture is influencing our new era of global politics.


| By Kristin Ljungkvist

The Global City as Global Security Leader

The walled city once symbolized security. In these globalized times, leaders may build airports rather than walls, yet cities – not nations – once again increasingly stand on the front line of security. 


| By Ivo H. Daalder

This Week’s Reads - China Rising?

The coming months are likely to be a volatile and unpredictable time for US-China relations and for each country’s position within the global world order. This Week’s Reads shed light on the issues and dynamics at play in China’s potential rise.


One More Question with Richard Haass

Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, says the world is entering an era of disarray. We asked him how he saw the role of think tanks like the Council on Foreign Relations and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs


| By Brian Hanson

Deep Dish: Trump Immigration Ban – Making America Safe or ISIS Great?

President Trump’s executive order suspending new refugee admissions and blocking travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries has sparked protests across the United States and shocked the world. Ian Tuttle says Trump’s order is mostly right on substance but wrong on rollout, while Robert Pape says Trump is making ISIS great again. Listen to this episode of Deep Dish to hear two leading voices describe what’s at stake.


| By Brian Hanson

Deep Dish: Trump's Power in True Trade Wars

International trade was a centerpiece of President Trump’s campaign. This week's Deep Dish podcast discusses what powers Trump has to change trade policy and what it would look like if he or another nation initiated a true trade war. 


| By Ivo H. Daalder

This Week's Reads – Populism in Power

On both sides of the Atlantic, we have entered a new and uncertain era – one of nationalism and populism in power. This Week's Reads examine major speeches by President Trump and UK Prime Minister May and provide some perspectives on the shifting roles of United States and Britain in global politics. 


One More Question with Sarah Kendzior

Globe and Mail columnist Sarah Kendzior joined an expert panel at the Council on January 19 to discuss media and democracy in a post-truth era. We asked her for the best and worst case scenarios on how the media landscape may evolve—watch her response.