The defense of Europe: yes, but against whom? or rather against what?

Xavier HOUZEL

Download the article as PDF

Executive summary: How relevant are European defence projects to current geopolitical issues? Since the end of the cold war, the European Union has not effectively imposed itself on Russia either as a coherent partner or as a military power because of American domination over Western Europe. Historical analysis reveals how the United States methodically established its hegemony: the Bretton Woods agreements, the Marshall Plan, NATO, to control Western Europe under the pretext of Soviet threat. This strategy aimed less at defending Europe than at serving American expansionism. The United Kingdom played the role of American “Tropy Horse” in Europe, accepting its military dependence (Nassau Accords, 1962) before finally leaving the EU. At the same time, the United States has expanded its influence in the Middle East. Today, in the face of the American “pivot to Asia” and the emergence of BRICS, Europe is in a precarious position, and only France has an autonomous nuclear capability while Germany remains demilitarized. Without a national constitution and cohesion, the EU looks like an “invertebrate animal” unable to define against whom or what to defend itself. The Ukrainian and Israeli-Palestinian conflicts mask the real challenges: the possible collapse of the American system and the emergence of new powers. Diplomacy and peace agreements should be given priority rather than mass rearmament, and Europe must first “learn to defend itself against itself” before it can provide its military defence.

Keywords: Western Europe, European Defence, United States of America, Soviet Union – tick, Cold War, Marshall Plan, Bretton Woods, NATO, Russia, Military Dependence, Autonomous Nuclear Capacity, Nassau Accords, BRICS, Donald Trump, Ukrainian Conflict, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Constitution.

Abstract: How relevant are European defence projects to current geopolitical issues? Since the end of the cold war, the European Union has not effectively imposed itself on Russia either as a coherent partner or as a military power because of American domination over Western Europe. Historical analysis reveals how the United States methodically established its hegemony: the Bretton Woods agreements, the Marshall Plan, NATO, to control Western Europe under the pretext of Soviet threat. This strategy aimed less at defending Europe than at serving American expansionism. The United Kingdom played the role of American “Tropy Horse” in Europe, accepting its military dependence (Nassau Accords, 1962) before finally leaving the EU. At the same time, the United States has expanded its influence in the Middle East. Today, in the face of the American “pivot to Asia” and the emergence of BRICS, Europe is in a precarious position, and only France has an autonomous nuclear capability while Germany remains demilitarized. Without a national constitution and cohesion, the EU looks like an “invertebrate animal” unable to define against whom or what to defend itself. The Ukrainian and Israeli-Palestinian conflicts mask the real challenges: the possible collapse of the American system and the emergence of new powers. Diplomacy and peace agreements should be given priority rather than mass rearmament, and Europe must first “learn to defend itself against itself” before it can provide its military defence.

Keywords: Western Europe, European Defense, United States of America, Soviet Union, Cold War, Marshall Plan, Bretton Woods, NATO, Russia, Military Dependence, Autonomous Nuclear Capability, Nassau Accords, BRICS, Donald Trump, Ukrainian Conflict, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Constitution.