As the European Union seeks to bolster its defence capabilities after years of underinvestment, leaders across the bloc broadly agree on the need for stronger defence, though stark differences remain on how to achieve this goal. Diverging political views and national interests continue to shape the debate, with political groups, from moderates to the far-right, bringing conflicting visions for the future of Europe’s security framework.
Chair of the European Parliament’s Security and Defence subcommittee (SEDE), Marie-Agnes Strack Zimmerman (Renew Europe/Germany), sees a European Defence Union as essential to fill existing capability gaps. Speaking with Euronews, Strack Zimmerman emphasized the need for European countries to overcome their “national industry mentality” and collaborate more closely. Advocating for a European army, increased cooperation with allied nations, and expanded EU-level funding for defence, she proposed eurobonds as a potential financing solution.
However, Strack Zimmerman’s vision is likely to face opposition from the EU’s far-right factions, which gained seats in the June elections. Members of the far-right groups Patriots for Europe (PfE) and the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) generally view NATO as the cornerstone of Europe’s defence. Claudiu Târziu (Romania/ECR) and Reinis Poznaks (Latvia/ECR) argue that EU defence measures should reinforce NATO rather than seek greater autonomy from the alliance.
While far-right MEPs acknowledge the need for stronger defence, they see this within a national framework. “Small countries like Latvia, Lithuania, or Estonia cannot buy everything they need,” said Poznaks, suggesting that cooperation is necessary, though he believes defence capabilities should remain a national prerogative. Alice Teodorescu (Sweden/PfE) also supported reinforcing Europe’s defence industry, arguing it could help NATO’s resilience while respecting national sovereignty.
The question of funding looms large. EU estimates suggest an additional €50 billion is needed over the next decade to make Europe’s defence industry competitive with global powers like the US and China. To address this shortfall, SEDE Commissioner-designate Andrius Kubilius (EPP/Lithuania) has expressed openness to alternative financing, such as shared debt. However, Portuguese MEP António Tânger Corrêa (PfE) opposes central EU mechanisms like eurobonds, advocating instead for individual member-state control over defence budgets.
Strack Zimmerman further called for a European army, a concept embodied by the EU’s Rapid Deployment Capacity (RDC), set to be operational by 2025. However, radical and far-right groups resist this, viewing a common EU army as a potential encroachment on national sovereignty. Târziu voiced support for the RDC only within strict limits, while Poznaks dismissed the idea, insisting NATO should remain the primary defence alliance.
One area of potential agreement lies in integrating allied non-EU countries, such as the UK, into the EU’s defence market. The UK, a major NATO ally, has strengthened bilateral defence pacts with EU members, and Strack Zimmerman advocates privileged market access for the UK, given its close partnership. Poznaks also supports this idea, provided conditions are in place to ensure compatibility and avoid dependency on non-EU components.
These ongoing divisions indicate that any progress towards a unified EU defence strategy will require significant negotiation. As Europe seeks to strengthen its defence posture, the role of NATO and the extent of EU-led initiatives will continue to test the bloc’s ability to align competing national interests with a shared security vision.