The Great European Rearmament, Why It’s Failing, and What the U.S. is Doing About It

(left) Photo via Getty Images/AFP/P. Hertzog, (Right) Photo via Asia Times files / AFP / EPA

***

At the start of 2025, the European Union announced plans for an extended line of credit for defense investments amounting to over 800 Billion euros. Talks for increased military expenditure started with the Russo-Ukrainian War, which has led many EU countries to increasingly worry about national defense. 

There are currently 5 main goals the EU has laid out: 

1. Security Action for Europe (SAFE): This would raise up to 150 billion euros to invest in member states to streamline military procurement and production, with a focus on inter-military cooperation and joint projects.  
2. Boosting national defense funding: Increase defense spending for EU Member States to 1.5% of that state’s GDP. 
3. Making EU instruments more flexible to allow greater defense investment: This would foster cohesion, innovation, boost the economy of the EU, and increase military flexibility.
4. Contributions from the European Investment Bank: European Investment Bank (EIB) is offering greater loans to countries for defense purposes. 
5. Mobilising private capital: To foster innovation and increase investments in the defense sector. 

Many defense concerns were exacerbated by President Donald Trump’s warning that U.S. priorities now lie within the Middle-East and Pacific regions. President Trump stated that “The United States faces consequential threats to our homeland. We must—and we are—focusing on the security of our own borders.” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth likewise stated that the U.S. would not rescue any European country invaded by Russia. Without U.S. protection, many EU countries have felt increasingly threatened by Russia since the start of the Ukrainian War and desire to revitalize the EU defense industry to a level not seen since the Cold War. 

Over the past year, countries such as Sweden that were non-aligned since the Napoleonic War until joining NATO in 2024. While also attempting to increase their conscription age from 47 to 70, having reintroduced conscription in 2017. Germany, who abolished the draft in 2011 has since, as of October 2025, attempted to enact the conscription bill through the Bundestag. This was vetoed by centre-left SPD, who wanted a purely voluntary force while the centre-right CDU wanted a lottery system. The German Bundeswehr announced plans to increase from 180,000 soldiers to 260,000 but have been plagued with constant underfunding and have a reputation of being poorly equipped. Many believe Germany can’t reach the soldier requirements without conscription. 

There have also been many breaks within the EU among limits on debt spending with a push to allow debt spending for defensive procurement and investment. Countries such as Germany, famous for their debt break, have already agreed to allow for unlimited spending for defense to increase the national army. 

There have been many conflicts among EU members regarding rearmament, mainly issues relating to inter-government conflicts, financial struggles, and challenges expanding national armies. These conflicts prompted the EU to release an updated readiness program in mid-October. This highlighted the need for air and space defense as well as increased drone procurements. While supported by many EU members bordering Russia, Germany and France new next-generation fighter jets with competition between defense contractors leading to the project nearly collapsing. The jet has been in the works since 2017 and is supposed to be next-generation fighter jet; but, contractors have threatened to suspend work on the project due to inter-company tensions risking the continued development of the project. 

Many countries, likewise, have not seen economic rebounds from the pandemic which has prevented increased spending on defense. This has become an area of contention since last August, when, at a NATO meeting, countries agreed to increase NATO spending from 2% of GDP to 5% of GDP. This is a current expenditure not paid by any NATO country, with the closest being Poland at 4.48% of GDP and the U.S at 3.22% of GDP spending on defense. Many defense contracts have been hesitant to increase production for Europe, primarily focusing on national armies which have historically operated with little competition domestically. With all these obstacles, many efforts to remilitarize have stalled or are progressing at a slower pace than expected. 

Image via NATO (note: NATO guideline has since been increased to 5%)

***

This graph shows a pattern of U.S. dependence since the end of the Cold War, with a constant deployment between 70,000 and 90,000 U.S. troops stationed in Europe. President Trump has been critical of the EU’s dependence on U.S defense while also failing to meet goals set out for a common defense of the European Continent. While EU countries have maintained national armies there has been little expansion of them, with the most money being spent on social and healthcare programs. Many experts claim that increased expenditure is only making up for the lack of updates to militaries since the Cold War, rather than seeing any real expansion. Some elements of the EU are talking of cutting social programs to increase defense spending. 

The U.S. has since increased involvement in the Pacific regions, primarily in the countries of Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines, but also other countries such as Indonesia, Australia, and Vietnam. North Korea and China are seen as bigger threats to the U.S. it is likely that many Asian and Oceanic countries will be increasingly receptive of U.S. military support. China has become increasingly confrontational, which has shifted many South Asian countries to becoming increasingly receptive to U.S aid. Japan recently agreed to meet a 2% GDP spending on defense, a level of military investment not seen in Japan since WWII. There will be further investments in satellites and other defense capabilities in the coming years. Trump has been pressuring South Korea to increase defense spending to 3.5% of its GDP and Taiwan to increase spending to 10%, to which Taiwan agreed to an increase to 5% over the coming years. It appears Trump has become increasingly persistent to Asian allies to increase defense spending, signifying a shift in U.S foreign policy away from European politics to a more Pacific focus. This signifies a shift in global politics where China instead of Russia is becoming the primary rival of the U.S. 

***

This article was edited by Anna-Rose Barnes.