The EU Should Have An ArmyIt is time for Europe to learn to fend for itself.
MAY 9, 2022
ANTHONY J. CONSTANTINI
America needs to “Pivot to Asia” to take on China. This fact has led some to reconsider how America should conduct itself abroad. After all, a pivot toward one thing means a pivot away from something else. In this case, “something else” is Europe, willingly occupied by the U.S. since the end of the Second World War. How exactly to disengage from Europe while readjusting to face China has been the source of considerable debate. Some, like the neoconservatives, want America to stay in Europe while also re-orienting against China, but this risks over-expansion. Others, like the burgeoning New Right, would prefer it if America simply pulled out of Europe whole-cloth and turned to Asia. But this risks angering close allies and would make it difficult to convince smaller Asian states of our trustworthiness.
There is, however, another solution which has until now been met with derision from all sides of the American political spectrum: American support for the creation of a European Union army. The notion of an E.U. army has naturally been opposed by those who want us to stay in Europe forever, but it has curiously also been met with ambivalence or outright opposition by many in the New Right, and President Donald Trump reacted angrily to French President Emmanuel Macron’s mention of the idea in 2018. Conservatives and anyone who wishes for the U.S. to successfully pivot to Asia should reconsider this position. The creation of an E.U. army would accomplish three key U.S. foreign-policy goals, all of which are necessary for a successful pivot: focusing less on Europe, bringing parity to NATO spending, and focusing more on confronting China.
Much of the angst over the pivot to Asia and American disengagement from Europe centers around NATO. The United States has treaty obligations to NATO that it cannot break if it is to remain trusted by its once and future allies. However, those obligations were made when the threat to America came from the USSR. That threat no longer exists. In its place sits the Russian Federation, which has had difficulty making progress in its invasion of the significantly weaker Ukraine. Though it might wish to, it does not threaten the United States. China, however, does, and it sits on the other side of the continent. The U.S. must find a way to disengage in the West to focus East, and Europe coming into its own would give America the cover to do so.
If the E.U. were to form an army, it would also enable the U.S. to finally bring parity to NATO spending. Over two-thirds of NATO members are E.U. members, and as of 2021, less than one-third of NATO members were spending at least 2 percent of their GDP on defense. Many have excused the other members’ paltry spending by pointing out America’s wealth; if the E.U., with a GDP similar to America’s, becomes a military bloc, these excuses vanish. While NATO would not be a strictly two-member alliance—key members like the U.K. and Norway would remain, as would smaller states that sit outside of the E.U.—the U.S. and the E.U. would represent its core. A mostly U.S.-E.U. NATO would allow America to meet the three aforementioned goals with one single policy. Europe would no longer need America’s protection, NATO would be balanced, and America would be able to focus on China while remaining true to its promises.
* * *
Source:
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-eu-should-have-an-army/
