Should the EU Form Its Own Army?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ย. 2024
- Sign up for a 7-day free trial and enjoy all the amazing features Guardio has to offer. guard.io/eusimple
We look at 4 Tiers of possible defense integration: from establishing a EU foreign policy as the foundation to the ambitious goal of forming a full-fledged EU army. An EU Defense Union is gaining momentum and sparking discussions across the globe. But what does it mean? The pressing question we face is the depth of integration necessary to assert European sovereignty on the global stage, especially against superpowers such as the US, China, and Russia. In today's geopolitical climate, where the notion of national sovereignty faces challenges, a certain degree of integration seems imperative to safeguard European interests and autonomy.
We delve into the perspectives of influential European leaders like Ursula von der Leyen, Emmanuel Macron, Donald Tusk, and Olaf Scholz, exploring their global aspirations and how they shape the EU's defense strategy. The video also highlights the divergent visions of key EU member states-Germany, France, and Poland-each proposing unique paths toward achieving a more secure and unified Europe. This exploration not only sheds light on the complexities of EU defense integration but also underscores the critical need for a unified approach in navigating the intricate landscape of international relations and security.
Support the Channel:
💁♂️ Patreon: / eumadesimple
☕ Buy me a Coffee: www.buymeacoff...
📷 TH-cam: / theeumadesimple
Sources:
www.statista.c...
www.youtube.co...
eupinions.eu/d...
www.bertelsman...
www.dw.com/en/...
www.france24.c...
• Trump says he’d let Ru...
www.politico.e... significant%20price%20in%20 Russian%20 military%20production.&text=Russia%20is%20gearing%20up%20for,in%20a%20report%20published%20Tuesday.
www.euronews.c...
europeanconser...
• "Alle für einen, einer...
• EU #security and #defe...
• The future of European...
Sign up for a 7-day free trial and enjoy all the amazing features Guardio has to offer. guard.io/eusimple
In your Video about the proposals on the amendment of the EU you mentioned the council meeting is likely scheduled for March. Are there any new informations?
I dont get why you frame Trump as an enemy of Europe, when he’s simply asking Europe to pull its weight, to pay the amount that was agreed upon when entering NATO. How’s that a bad thing?
European army -yes
EU army-hell no
@@EUMadeSimple 🇪🇺
@@EUMadeSimple 🇪🇺
Fully agree with everything, wishes from Lithuania🇱🇹🇪🇺❤
Ah yes, Trump. A man who famously pays his bills…
Just a few days ago Trump claimed he was a billionaire, then said he can't pay his 450 million dollar fine for (a few) of his 91 felonies. Lol.
He's right in this case, though. Europe has been famous for spending lavishly on social benefits and infrastructure while the US foots the bill for defense of the continent. Then Europeans spit in the face of Americans, calling us warmongers and uneducated and insulting our systems. You don't get to do that and expect us to continue paying for your security.
Trump is more suited for staging fake wrestiling and mudpit fighting.
@@draum8103That's because nobody has his entire fortune in cash. Most billioners have most of their fortunes in stocks, bonds, real estate properties, shares of various companies etc.
@@draum8103 tbf that is incredibly hard to find the liquidity for.
I'm from Hungary and I fully support a United States of Europe, and a Tier 4 European Army
Right on bruh
Hell no
I'm from Ukraine and I love you
If you want that to happend, your country needs a new prime minister. Your prime minister is going to block every advancement in that direction.
Change your gouvernement
In my opinion, it is important to understand the difference between European defense and European army (the two are often confused).
The European army is something difficult to implement, since it will take many decades to get all the nations to agree, while the common defense is conceptually simpler since it allows each nation to preserve its own armed forces.
The risk that NATO will fail, although minimal, is not negligible and it is good that Europeans are ready for this eventuality, which is why I consider European defense to be something of a very high priority.
I think that a good defense of the European Union is a firm step towards the right goal the establishment of the 4th pillar common defense. And also a fail safe for NATO and the USA.
Yes yes it is a national prerogative but it would be fair for all EU states to have the same wages in military and same training and be good and greatly coordinated.
In the end they are all defending the same thing: our lives, lifestyles and freedoms. Same goal.
You guys know that the United States President doesn't have the authority to "pull out," that can only be done by Congress. Also, Trump is an ass and his own base is turning on him. Many people that voted for him the first time, because he was a wildcard, now hate him. It is also not like we will throw away everything we have done and sacrificed to build this alliance up. Hell, if Europe would just go all in and fight against Russia (or until an American dies)...you'll all find out why we don't have "free" social services. Trust me, after seeing Russia get it's ass handed to them by a country that is smaller than a few of my states by woefully untrained resistance fighters...this will be easier than destroying the Iraqi army. I fear you guys just don't have the stomach to do what must be done. I swear to God...if USA has to do another Normandy landing because you guys failed to act...how about all USA debts we owe to any of you will be forgiven?
Thank you! It's so annoying hear in the word European army used interchangeably with European defence
The problem is that nations will have the own interests and will not just come the their aid. This is what happens when we got separate armies since most nations will just say that it is their problem not ours. A EU army/federation will remove those individual national interests by dissolving the individual nations states ability for autonomy when it comes to their millitary. Though that would require giant EU reforms like a EU president in charge of the millitary with its own command structure basically creating a EU presidential election.
It will not happen since we like to dig our heads in the sand and pretend that there is no problem until its too late to act. This is how people work now instead of before where we actually tried to solve problems and accepted reality. The concept of a EU federation has existed since Churchill.
@@thomasmerlin4990 European defence cooperation will only continue with an increasingly erratic Putin to the east and unreliable Trump or Biden to the west. But a true unified European Army... Only Macon seems seriously interested in that and no one else. It's herding cats.
Tier 4, with a qualified majority as my favourite
Tier 4 is extremely dangerous for the European population. I dont trust the European Parlament even tho Im pro EU.
Why shouldnt such an European Army be used internally as a police force or the next time a member state tries to leave?
100% agreed, from Hungary.
Such a thing cannot happen in defence. Would a country who voted against a war send its citizens to fight in it? This is why nato works the way it does.
@@kingdedede1066 There is a single European citizenship alongside national citizenship.
@@falsevacuum4667 you would need a federation before this level of integration could be considered, and then there would be no point in a qualified majority anyway
Tier 4
Considering the options we don’t have much a choice anymore. We need a fully integrated European military.
of course we have no choice... we need this asap
@@Elliasp-xx7mbWe do have a choice, but having 27 voices is a massive weakness that others are playing on, we need to streamline the process in getting things done, that likely means removing the veto rule.
If we don't get our act together, we'll likely get pushed aside by the other big powers.
@@paul1979uk2000 of course I agree. I meant : "we have no choice to do this now" ;)
@@Elliasp-xx7mb True, and honestly, the groundwork for this should have been laid well over a decade ago, too much time has been wasted, and honestly, I have to blame Germany, they've been way too slow on all this, they've been too trusting of Russia and part of the blame is on the eastern EU members who are too trusting of the US, but don't get me wrong, they are our allies, but to think they care about us in Europe is laughable at best, sad at worse, they care about self-interest of the US only and it's high time Europeans wake up to that reality and start looking after themselves, and the best way to do that is through the EU, both Trump and Putin are clear indicators that we in Europe need a stronger voice.
@@paul1979uk2000 They all remind me Harry Potter : "No, Voldemor is not here !!! We don't need war !" ;-))
We need Tier 3 at LEAST.
Awesome video!
If the EU can't even handle the problems of today like energy and immigrants from outside the EU then I don't want higher tiers. Fix these problems first and then we can see what happends next
Alright, this is the best channel ever to learn those kind of stuff, thx you very much eu made simple
Europe can't stay dependent on NATO. It only takes a single US president with isolationist policies to essentially disable NATO. Besides, Europe relying on the US for defense only weakens it diplomatically, allowing for the US to interfere in European affairs.
Europe needs to be fully autonomous in order to stay competetive against other global powers.
As a french tier 4 never depend on the outside, especially for security
Somebody should ask Macron if France is ready to hand over control of their nukes to the EU.
My guess is it will be like the 20 minimum wage in California and Starbucks is not included. I think France would find a way
Yup thats the part they don't say in their speeches. They want to keep control of their nuclear weapons but they want others to pay for it.
Uhm. They are already bound for nuclear response as a part of nato
I highly doubt that France will use nukes for other nations and risk to become a target itself
Ready? That's basically his plan...
The EU has a population of 450 million, not 700 million...
Yeah, I think they mixed up the EU’s pop and the continent’s pop
@@kennethmoses4900 He did not. He clearly spoke of a united European continent of around 700 million people at 8:27
@@mathiaswetekam1253 Yup, but that's kind of dumb to say that as a united europe of 700 million people we can stand strong, because no, were are not a united europe of 700 million but of 450 million people
As of now, we can't include countries like Turkey, Serbia etc into the equation, it's just doesn't make sense, even on the long term
He should have just said we are very powerful as a united europe of 450, which is both true, and good enough, hell ! That's more than the USA's population ! For a more or less equivalent economy
Start by getting rid of Orban
Sacrificing your country's foreign policy, particularly countries with a colonial past and colonial obligations, is to sacrifice your sovereignty.
No common foreign policy.
No EU military or resources.
No Nato.
Ee need to reclaim ourvsovereignty.
NATO should be base of our security cooperation, and therefore it is important that NATO🪖 has a primary role in our defense cooperation, but the EU should indeed have a larger secondary role🇪🇺!
The crisis in Afghanistan 2021 was a clear example of the EU's need for a reaction force that could help keep the exits of Afghanistan open, so that European countries weren't as dependent on American Forces as was the case at Kabul airport in 2021
The EU should also ensure🇪🇺:
- EU tender procedures to ensure; military hardware (tanks, aircraft, artillery, etc.)✈💣
- Shared; aircraft-carriers, refueling-planes, aircraft-bombers, satellites etc. 🛰📡🚢
- Highly specialized reaction brigades that can secure hotspots in the world with our allies🪖
- Joint procurement of equipment to ensure cheaper and larger procurement of ammunition and equipment🪖💣🔫
Just a question but why is turkey shown as part of the EU?
Yes.
Tier 4 asap
No individual countries, one federalized Europe under a common flag!
As for Macron, he would be better off improving his measly support for Ukraine than lecturing others who do several times as much. This has been the problem for a long time: people are quick to develop fantasies for their own benefit, see Airbus Defense, and let others pay the bill. Macron only enters into cooperation for his own benefit. The British and Italians prefer to develop the new fighter jet with Japan, as France has repeatedly withdrawn from arms cooperation if it did not get its way. And which European wants to be drawn into his African colonial wars by Macron? Non, merci.
The EU should have it’s own Army.
The EU should be fully Federal.
EU-army it is. What else could it be... We need a European Republic anyway.
America can't leave nato as Europe is only thing keeping america from being challenged and vise versa plus Congress won't allow it, sorry trump😂
The EU is not mandated to have an army. It must require a new or revised treaty.
I don't even think that Trump knows the difference of the 2% GDP defence budget agreement and actual NATO membership fees.
I think we should ramp up. We have the basis in the EU Battle Groups. Let's built on those and make them the sword of the EU!
I am a federalist and from Finland
Trump is right about the EU not meeting defense commitments, and he's not the only US president to complain about it; Obama did as well. Long story short, the EU essentially freeloads on American defense infrastructure and spending. When Russia attacked Ukraine, it wasn't the EU that responded, it was the US and UK. I'm all for a European army because it means the US can reduce its defense spending, and it'll mean your welfare benefits take a hit. A win/win in my book.
Trump is just angry with everyone, if it's not military budgets, it would be something else he would pick on.
@@jeffmorris5802I think you misunderstand, it's not freeloading, it's more that Europeans, especially western ones in the EU don't see Russia as much of a threat to need to spend more.
The irony is that many are seeing the US more as a threat lately, especially with Trump, and I think Trump is the one that focusing minds in Europe more than Putin is doing, but not for the reasons that you think, many Europeans are seeing the US as being too polarised, erratic and unpredictable, it's that what is really making many Europeans to think, so Putin got the ball rolling but the US is adding to that and it's not just Europeans thinking that, many are starting to see that the US isn't what it used to be.
Also, what are you talking about, if you combine EU and its members spending, they put far more money in Ukraine then the US have done, it was close in how much both were giving to Ukraine, but with all the political wrangling going on with the Republicans and Democrats, the EU has been taking the lead, so enough with the freeloading BS.
As for the US, it could reduce its military spending, but it probably won't because of China, in fact, the US might end up spending more as China becomes a bigger threat, there's also the factor of the EU pushing on arms production first, that's probably intentional to build an arms industry, considering the US is already a big arms seller, having the EU being one would very likely be in direct competition with the US on the world market and would likely eat into the sales of arms the US sells around the world, that would put a squeeze on the US budget, meaning either the military budget will shrink or American taxpayers have to dig deeper to fund it, whereas on the EU side, they have everything to play when it comes to arms sales.
Also, welfare benefits are unlikely to take a hit, maybe you don't realise this, but European countries used to spend far more on the military decades ago than they do now and still had an effective welfare system, the US doesn't have much of a welfare system because it chooses not to have one, it's not really a money issue, in fact on average, Americans spend around twice as much as other modern countries and get worse results, the system is the problem not money.
@@jeffmorris5802 dude Ukraine is not in EU and not in NATO but USA has a lot of investments in Ukraine and that is that USA is protecting.
I often think of the 2nd WW from many pow but the 2 things I will tell are these Germany in little time almost knelt Europe if the reds would have lost the Americans would have never help the allies because they wouldn’t have won the war
@@atharvaveda87 The US doesn't have literally anything in Ukraine. Apple is worth 15x Ukraine's entire pre-war GDP.
Ukraine may not be in NATO or the EU, but it is literally on Europe's doorstep. Like, you're RIGHT next to it. The USA, perhaps you were unaware, in on the other side of the damn planet.
EU army... and keep everyone out. US and Russia.
Yes
Greetings from Ukraine! 💙💛 Thanks for your job!
Hitler annexed Austria and the Sudetenland. Then Czechoslovakia. Then Poland. Nobody stopped Hitler then! Consequence -> WW2
Therefore: Tyrants and Terrorists (Hitler/Putin/Hamas) should NOT be APPEASED, they must be STOPPED!
You can always help Freedom protect itself: Come Back Alive Foundation - Charity Organization, UNITED24, etc.
Join the Brave: International Legion for the Defence of Ukraine.
I disagree with the view you're presenting. A common foreign policy should be the last step towards unity because it directly affects a nation's sovereignty over its international relations.
As someone from France, I support a Europe with different levels of integration. At its heart, there should be a federation with a shared army, initially led by France and Germany, but open to others willing to join. I won't list potential countries besides Germany because I can't assume their interest, but any concept without the Franco-German axis is difficult to imagine.
Considering the EU's diversity, a one-size-fits-all approach won't work.
If the EU doesn't fully federate, allowing countries to keep their foreign policies, I still think an EU defense force focused on protecting EU land is necessary. This wouldn't stop countries from having their own expeditionary forces if they wish so.
In a layered EU, there'd be a central federal army, an EU-wide defense force (for all, even non-federated countries), and, optionally, national forces for those not federated.
France and Germany are weak. France is a muslim country. Exactly like Germany
@@Misterx-xx1lj You probably never visited France so why are you crying ? Muslim represent 15% of the population and we are going to stop immigration so it won't be more than that.
Mind your own buisness you are probably coming from a shitty country so you have a lot to do.
Oui!!!!
As an American, I am deeply troubled by the amount of pro Putin Trump supporters in my country.
As a Frenchman...I am troubled by the current situation. I voted far right to send home this government that wants to take us to the 3ww. Vive la France
I think the criticism on Germany in this case isn't justified. Macron is not wrong but he wants too much too fast. Germany isn't sceptic because it disagrees on the idea but because we need to achieve much more European integration before we can make these steps. You're also making the mistake to think that Germany and France can just decide everything because they are the most powerful. The idea of the EU is the exact opposite. It's that small countries and minoritys have the same rights as others. If Germany would push forward like France, people would accuse them of abusing their power. Also good luck on reducing the number of weapon systems. There are simply too many inner EU rivalrys. Even the developement programs for the next few decades are worrying. Germany France and Spain develope a 6th gen combat aircraft while Italy and Sweden develope another one together with the UK. Poland is buying Tanks and Artillery from South Korea now simply because the former Government absolutely hated Germany. The problem is not Governments not being brave enough, it is that most people still think in national dimensions and everybody just wants pieces of the cake for themselves. What we need is not only different policies. We need a European cultural revolution. I don't see that happening any time soon though.
With regards to the parallel different developments and precurements: there's strategic strenght in diversity. There's an extra level of redundancy; a Zero Day, other exploit or other disruption can't cripple a whole fleet of 2 different fighter models (that have some parity)
The added complexity and inefficiency of having to rely?on multiple seperate supply lines might offset strategic value, so let's definitively not start developing a 3rd nextgen fighter.
To finish off with a quote my favourite movie (ghost in the shell 1995):
"No matter how powerful we may be fighting-wise, a system where all the parts react the same way is a system with a fatal flaw. Like individual, like organization overspecialization leads to death."
- Motoko to Togusa, after the latter inquired to why the former added a human without cybernetic andadvanced technological battle enhancement to the SpecOps team
@@jezusbloodie That is correct but overall there are definitely too many weapon systems in Europe. It shouldn't be all the same since, as you said, there's strength in diversity, but at the moment it is definitely too much.
@@Micha-qv5uf Fair, it is a bit (very) much with most material and equipment.
Yes, absolutely. There's literally no reason to not go ahead with that.
United we are stronger. Tier 4 from me with Qual majority.
All the way, obviously. No EU country actually needs a separate army. Is Germany afraid of the imminent invasion by Denmark? Is Spain preparing for the French? Of course not, the only army that makes sense in the EU is an EU army. As for EU Battle Groups, there will likely soon be a chance to test them out. Ukraine is too high intensity - high casualty rate would be bad start for an EU Army - but Moldova with its Transinistria problem and Bosnia with Republika Srpska will likely soon go hot and those are ideal environments for EUBGs. Finally, unanimity is one big problem but money is the other big problem. EU Army needs to be funded through EU bonds. There's simply no different way to finance any large rearmament of Europe, skimming few billion here and there from different programs is never going to work.
Denmark?
Calm your goals there buddy.
Luxemburg would take us at this point man
Although I see your point, it’s not just about defending from each other, but national interests. Will France help Spain fend off their issues? Will Hungary approve of specific missions? The smaller the country the less say they have over military issues, making at least for now, a national army necessary.
Thing is most countries (and the people living there) like their own sovereignty and having your own army, that you and only you can control is a big part of that sovereignty.
Also the EU is not as stable as you might think!
Euroscepticism has been on the rise for the past couple of years, populism, nationalism and far right ideologies are also experiencing a surge in a lot of EU countries.
Keeping a national army on top of an Federal Army would be nice if the EU federal project goes tits up. Othervise I am all for Federation of Europe.
I hope Europe will stand with Serpska.
Thank you for such a detailed material. As a Ukrainian I understand how crucial it is to have a unity in defence questions.
As a Ukrainian too, this idea is really good, considering last news from the USA.
EU-army will not be dependent from the USA and any other nation, military communication and connections between countries will be on the highest level.
Moreover, the only danger for the hypothetical EU-army can be on east front, so Ukraine will make this army much more stronger: the country on the east block, with one of the strongest army in Europe and experience of real war.
But I really hope this our experience will never be needed and this war is the last in Europe
Time to buy more shares in the defense industry
Tier4!!!
Tier 4 is extremely dangerous for the European population. I dont trust the European Parlament even tho Im pro EU.
Why shouldnt such an European Army be used internally as a police force or the next time a member state tries to leave?
Fully integrate. As a conservative Italian member of the EU parliament said, "the EU should not do many things, just a few, important things". Defense should be one of such things.
The EU should take it one step at a time. Common procurement before common polixy and all that.
NATO is the basis of defence n Europe. The EU does not need a common foreign and defence policy, because it already exists in NATO. All members must pay the minimum of 2%, that includes Luxembourg
lets harmonise the defence industry first, we can take our time with the actual military units working at a pace that suits populations of Europe. We're not in any immediate danger of an external threat (russia can't deal with 40 million how owuld they deal with 300 million?) besides it's better if he work on improving the economic aspect of military intergration first. have plenty of equipment before having the units.
I don't see that happening. There are too many defence companies with ties to their respective goverments.
@@Micha-qv5uf They will have to spread it out among contributing states to make it effective and palatable to the public. I really can't see any of this investment happening if all our money goes to Germany, Sweeden and Framce. But I suppose that would be still far better than the eastern bloc buying everything from the USA like they currently are.
So far the only true stand out and non swappable weapon from the US has been the patriot launcher because they wont stop taking down planes at the moment (around 18 in the last 21 days). Everything else could be made in house and works fine.
@@Micha-qv5uf That probably won't be that difficult to streamline those defence industries across the EU, the members would in the long run get more bang for their buck when it comes to equipment and arms and it could create a lot of jobs.
The real difficult part will be creating the political institution that does the decision-making on military and foreign policy matters, which it's a given that with an EU military, foreign policy matters will be a lot more streamlined at the EU level, they kinda go hand in hand.
Yes, please, I think a fully unified foreign policy is neither neccesary nor desirable
EU needs to become the Federation of Europe ASAP
Like Russia ?
@@SP95 Europe is a democracy, Russia a dictatorship.
@@Jurjen. What is a democracy ? Forcing 49% of the population to bow over the interest of 51% of the population ? That isn't far from what the USSR did.
@@SP95 "No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time" Churchill.
@@SP95with youre logic democracys dont exist
Tier 4 asap
I'm from the US and I support this. EU reliance on the US is strategically disadvantageous and politically difficult to maintain. EU common defense policy is a great idea.
Many Europeans agree with that too but we have the same problem as the US at the moment. Too many stupid people :D
Too many socialists*
Is not a bad thing for the USA.... They can sell weapons (more than 100 billions just in the last 2 years) and get an enormous amount of power by having an entire continent as pseudo vassals who will enforce their sanctions and basically double their power by following all their decisions, what Trump is saying is something you discuss in private not something you say out loud so your enemies can listen..... Also if you don't have your own plans you will be in someone else's plans.... Imagine if the USA choose isolationism with n**I Germany or the Ussr..... Even the USA could have spoken German or became communist by now.
Yeah imagine we would use all this money we spent on seperate armies now for one single one. We could have someting that is similar powerful like your US army. And if this new EU army gets the same NATO membership, we all would profit from that. Less comlpex command, structures less diverse equippment and maybe even a europe that can defend itself 😂 and don't ask you americans for help all the time. 😂😂😂 And we can still be partners and work together in NATO for our defence and our belive in freedom and democracy.
Thank you bro, as soon as we become capable then the world will look different at Europe´s defense capabilities.
Tier 3/4 would be awful for people wanting to make the military a career. Promotions would only happen to people from a few countries
Tier 1 is already hard with Orban in the EU...
Turkey is not a eu member state and they will not be one for a very long time your orban made sure of that
Merci. Intéressant et très utile. Je pense qu’il faut adopter d’urgence un calendrier contraignant pour parvenir à un Tier 3 opérationnel bien avant 2030. Il faudra un peu plus de temps pour le Tier 4; même si le plus vite serait le mieux.
Tier 3
Tier 4, hell 5 even!
I’m from Ireland I support eu army but hope uk help and have some relationship with eu you the brits in for this Ireland isn’t strong enough so you need the uk
I personally feel the EU should keep NATO, BUT does need a EU army.Europe needs to stand strong together.Dependance is never a good thing.
Tier 4! 🇪🇺
So, me a Portuguese have to agree to create an army where probably Germans would lead, so our foreign policy has to be dictated by a country who clearly doesn't care about us and the other small EU countries. Where I have seen that before?
Sorry it seems to me that Germany cares more than others. Look at Ukraine.
It’s a shame the UK left the EU but I am glad they did purely on the basic of this topic. I feel a European army is not a good idea and is something my nation would not agree with if it were still in the European Union of provocative states
yes, we need a European defense.
You are speaking like if we have choice. But we have no choice : we need a strong defense cooperation asap !
We do have a choice, but those choices are narrowing quickly, we have wasted a lot of time over the last decade as it is, are choices are simply, we either go into decline, where we get sidelined, pushed aside by the bigger powers like the US and China, or we can come together and defend our interest, and this isn't just on military matters, it will impact foreign policy matters, the economy and maybe even our social programs, we need a strong voice so we can defend our political, economic and social interest, otherwise in time, we might see those 3 being watered down by pressure from outsiders.
So we do have choices, but going on the political realities of how the world is shaping up, our choices are very limited towards decline or further integration into the EU, maybe a bit of decline is needed to reduce those doubters but that would be unfortunate for Europeans, so I don't see further integration as something desirable, I see it as something that over the long term is going to be needed, China and the US are the ones to contend with today, but there's a rising India and the potential of other blocks around the world forming, these are the realities we in Europe need to wake up to and fast because we've wasted too much time already, which if I were to put the blame on any of the countries, Germany would take a lot of the blame for being too trusting of Russia and not being aggressive enough in pushing to streamline the military process across the EU, the other blame is some of the eastern EU countries that are too trusting of the US, the truth is, the US only cares if they stand to benefit from it, if they don't, they rarely care about anything outside its own boarders, Europeans need to stand up and look after themselves and our best chance of that is through the EU together.
Europe obviously has a choice. That choice is NATO. The UK and USA are far more reliable than the cowards in Berlin and Paris, and if one day, for whatever reason, the US would leave NATO, getting nuclear weapons would be far more worthy than depending on "5000 helmets" Germany and "security guarantees for Putin" France.
TIer 4, but Tier 3 is easier in the short term
Tier 2 or maybe 3
If anything the EU should move towards a common defence force.
An EU army would be almost impossible as the Germans are still not over their feeling of shame from the 2nd WW.
A common defence force should also be able to move around the EU members that are neutral by their constitution, such as Ireland or Austria.
Furthermore, an EU defence force could allow countries such as Kosovo, Bosnia, Moldova,... to start to move into EU structures as the defence force could be open for candidate members. Which will strengthen the EU peacekeeping capabilities.
We should be able to respond collectively to threats within the EU, or against EU member-states, without necessarily involving NATO. Because the current system beefs up NATO while leaving gaping holes in non-NATO EU states' defensive capabilities.
No there should be no acting against EU countries, if the government changes in democratic election it's what people want and if they leave EU it's people's will, we should no intervene in others countires in EU
@@Kiiiurself8482 you have misunderstood what I said.
Yes European police force for domestic protection and European army just because we can.
@@atharvaveda87 Europol already exists, there is no need for a centralised EU police force. There is also no political appetite for it.
@@sevatarlives185 europol is a cooperation program not a single centralized police agency
Today with the geopolitical ambiance we are under, having a common defense in EU is an absolute MUST. In big Defense decisions - Small countries, like Portugal or Hungary - should move aside and let - NATO first or EU bigger ones - decide commons defense decisions. Especially over China or Russia, our sworn adversaries.
Eduardo from Lisbon
The EU shouldn't follow its master US & be independent of suggestions to be aniliated by following stupid advice.
The EU is supposed to be formed for the interests of its citizens not for self gain favorism
Well I think we could unite the fleets of EU countries to one big EU fleet with one command and buy aircraft carriers and submarines in addition, I also think that the air forces should work together much closely and look at our air space as an EU air space and not national ones if we talk about protecting it. It would make it much easier to deploy air crafts from one place to another inside the EU. For that we would need the same aircrafts and same protocols. Difficulties come when we talk about ground forces. I think we would have a common EU army with 60-70k personel that would be huge step ahead but I also think that battlegroups are a good direction. but not whole EU battle groups but to divide th EU to different regions with 2-3 countries soldiers in one group. Like scandinavians, Portugal and Spain etc. So they wouldn't need the whole Eu's aprovel. BTW I'am hungarian (sorry for our government) and I would be ready to give up a few souverinties. But well look we are a small country, we are not related to any other nations here so its not like France and Belgium or Austria and Germany we are alone and there are huge numbers of ethnis hungarian minorities in every bordering country. And we have to do everything to protect their interests which can't happen if we give up too much. Because a country like Spain or France where are minorities that may struggle won't support some other minorities in the other end of the EU. And what would be the gurantee that they would look out for our interests and the interests of hungarian nationals living in other countries?
it's not okay that a jackass like Orban can hijack the whole EU but what would happen if there were 26 Orbans and one sane guy? We cannot see the future it could happen. What would we do than?
Yes.
Every country doing this individually will never achieve the economies of scale that are necessary.
And who would be in charge of all the weapons and troops ? It would be a first not to have a state or governance directing and being responsible.
Tier 3 is max and most sensible
Could an EU Navy or Coast Guard be an option? It wouldn't be a full army of course but the combined operation of a European Navy at least would be more efficient in the long term, standardizing the fleets would be a good investment.
We need to aim towards tier 4, but to do it step by step. European innovation projects are a good first step imho, and to insure interoperability of the systems.
Anyway, M. Scholz surely slows us down here...
Military personnel from 1.5m to ... 1.5m? 1:10
Tier4
YES, so they can defend themselves and not rely on others
The last thing EU would need is a fight within their ranks and thats a historical tradition and real prospect without a common framework in place and EU can be used for that framework.
As for Nato and EU it is important and I think it will become increasingly important that EU have their own sub division within NATO controlled by them, funded by them, exclusively for their security.
It can be outside NATO but that will probably result in more friction with NATO than solving.
European sovereignty with EU politicians playing bad actors like Orban is very difficult.
Its always about self interest instead of the greater picture, especially with a war looming at the continent..
Disregard the members not willing to participate, but at a cost of a fine they have to pay if everyone has to fight for Europe.
Europe needs capable defense development.
The UK needs to join and we need a tier 4 to make the most united EU in history. With a message from the UK saying leaving was a mistake helping to unify the EU.
if the loathsome EU central institution railroads its member states into a pan-EU military, it'll undermine NATO's European pillar. At which point we British and every other non-EU NATO power should leave forthwith.
Tier 3, a separate EU force that supplements national armies would be an excellent addition. Not just for potential war in Europe, but for international operations outside Europe. Tier 4 is a bit much for me personally. We like our conscripted army here in Finland. If we tried to unify all militaries, either all countries need to institute conscription or none should have it. And the latter one is not something I'm in favor of.
And the earlier one is also not one im in favor off, besides tier 4 would force the defence industry of France with its fierce tradition of strategical autonomy to give all of its research and tech to Europe for Free, which Germany and the rest of Europe would love, but its the french tax which is spent into this and the french would not see a big return on investment from it. A european unified army is too federalist for my taste, and i dont want a federation just an union between sovereign countries, we dont NEED be fully unified afterall, only to stick together and make a united front against all threat to Europe
I am fully behind your idea. But it will not happen... not for decades. There is nothing like "European values" among ordinary citizens, at least not in Czechia where i live. Nowhere and noone talks about making Europe better. Everywhere (in politics, News, pubs) its always about us (Czech) and them (Germans, French, Polish)... Its simply not feasible in this environment.And its not just here in Czech, just look on german AfD, Polish PiS, French National Rally, Italy Brothers of Italy.... Now its time for national sovereignty sentiment and no EU values
A tier 4 army would need a single language of command. The EU countries should introduce a 10% tax rebate for everyone who speaks at least one EU language other than their native language on a near-native speaker level. make that 20% if anyone speaks two EU languages and 40% for 3. People would rush to break the EU language barriers. Spanish, Italian and French are easy to learn. Sure, English would win, but I’d like to see how many would learn more just to get that 20% tax rebate. How would this be financed? By the economic growth that’s guaranteed when people have more money for consumption.
No army for the EU, cost us money enough.
EU Army is impossible when a french soldier have more payments then his bolgarian colleagues.
But also you can't doing a Army with only 1 nationality, all of EU contries need to have their part (%) in this structure.
Only really possibility of this is a mercenaries divisions - "European Legion" like have France.
Europe rules the waves! (I'm a Ukrainian citizen)
Lets go build EU army. We can make brutal power.
Scholz never knows what he wants. Only thing he wants is saying as less as possible
As an american, i think tier 4, because europe needs to be more united because it really is not that significant when small nations talk about stuff, but when united, people will have to listen. Also again if trump is elected well, yeah, let's hope that doesn't ever happen
As European i dont like Tier 4 as much as people say nationalism is outdated and as true as it may be, our countries were sovereigns sometime for over a thousand years straight and a rare few much more than even that, a federation would cut that sovereignty apart, its easyier for pre existing federations to take a look at a European federation and love the idea Germany is born from a federation ofc it would be more tolerant of a bigger one. But like im french as much as we hate Paris we lived under a ideal of centralisation since long prior to the discovery of America, even if de facto it was only fully centralised much later. We may not be strong when divided, but if theres one thing im confident we can do, its that we can outlast the current superpowers and collaborate towards the same goal without uniting under the same banner. Besides we dont NEED to talk equal to equal with the other bigs, we only need to tell them that striking us down is not worth it as it only invites mutual destruction, or as the french doctrine would say "dissuasion from the weak to the strong"
If we can blow up the ten biggest and most important places in any given country even if we are the weaker one and disrespected, they will not bully as hard due to the risk
Well, EU is already under an independent ultra effective and modern deterrent French umbrela, for years..
In my opinion macrons idea of a multi level eu is the best at the moment to achieve a better consense. If people think they lose a their sovereignty they just participate on a lower level, get less advantages but aren't involved in the interesting shit
Of course its just common sense 20 years late though !
Great video thank you! Go for tier 4! 🚀
EU army can be build now, but as equipment pool. EU can acquire thousands of pieces of military equipment, let's say 5000 tanks and everything on that scale. Then we can lease it either to EU country in need, or to country which support EU policy: like Ukraine or African countries which can defend themselves against authoritarian regimes, or to counter terrorism.
to be fair. Germany pre full scale invasion was against lethal aid entirely. cause yknow history.
there's been an open discussion on whether we should arm drones.
militarism in Germany is politically dangerous.
so every such step needs to be carefully placed and therefore takes a lot longer.
Tier 3 schould be a goal that seems legit
Cooperation is good, a single unified European army is simply something Hitler or Napoleon would do, admittedly with extra steps
I think tier 3 is the best
1 continent, 1 country…!
and 1 debt?? no thanks ...pay your debt
I say YES for European army