"This would be impossible in Madrid." This is how the conversation begins between two of the most recognized voices on security matters at the epicenter of community legislative activity, Brussels. More than thirteen hundred kilometers separate Carrera de San Jerónimo from Plaza de Luxemburgo. Far from the spotlight of current events that usually falls on Paseo de la Castellana, in the community capital they are fully aware of the strategic moment that European defense is going through. Threats of a withdrawal of capabilities by the United States in NATO have ceased to be a hypothesis to become a reality on which various diplomatic teams are already working. Meanwhile, Europe is preparing for a scenario in which "open bar" ends and assumes that the time has come to start paying for this round itself.
Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, a Member of the European Parliament for the European People's Party and former Spanish Ambassador to NATO, leaves a committee room after speaking at a parliamentary meeting. At the same time, Javi López, Vice-President of the European Parliament and member of the Socialist Group, has just participated in a forum on the evolution of the war in Ukraine. Both take a break from their agendas to talk with Demócrata just days before the heads of state and government of the Atlantic Alliance meet in Ankara for their annual summit. Both share the idea that Europe needs to reduce its dependencies, including in the military sphere, in order to speak with its own voice and strengthen its strategic autonomy, even in its relationship with Russia.
"Europe cannot delegate its own defense," states Pascual de la Parte, who paints a picture of the current state of the European military industry. For his part, López defends the diplomatic efforts undertaken by the President of the European Council to prepare the ground for future conversations with the Kremlin. "We have been demanding for months that Europe have a seat at the adults' negotiation. That it be part of the negotiation, not the menu. This means talking to Russia," concludes the Catalan MEP.
Question: Everything indicates that next week's Ankara summit will mark one of NATO's most significant turns in recent years. Are we facing a historic change?
Nicolás Pascual (EPP): I wouldn't expect that much from the summit in Ankara either. In fact, the draft final communiqué is one page. When I was ambassador to NATO, I remember that the conclusions of these summits were 15 / 16 pages. Now it's one page. Why? Because everything is to be left very tied up at the ambassadorial level so that the summit debate at the head of state and government level is not opened, and the President of the United States is not left with much room for maneuver to change things. The more reduced the final communiqué is, the better. That final communiqué basically includes three three things.
First, to review NATO's military position and see how progress is being made on the commitments made at the Hague summit regarding Defense spending. Whether the commitments on capability objectives have been achieved or not, or if acceleration is needed.
Secondly, to consolidate or reiterate our unconditional support for Ukraine in the war against Russia, releasing the necessary funds, a loan of about 150 million euros over two years will be approved,
This must be put in connection with the promised review of the military presence in Europe by the United States that the Secretary of War announced for the next 6 months. We do not know what the result of this American review will be, but we fear that it will be less American presence. In any case, in Ankara what we have to renew is our transatlantic commitment, modernize it, update it and try to move forward together and at the same time reinforce the commitment to a European pillar of NATO.
Javi López (S&D): It is true that the relationship between the United States and NATO is changing.
The Atlantic commitment must be protected, it is unwavering, but at the same time the United States has clearly and explicitly stated that its presence on European soil will decrease. This is a substantial change in the relationship between the United States and Europe, and therefore we will have to take charge of our security autonomously and fully. This means strengthening European capabilities and having a strong European pillar of NATO capable of having sufficient and own decision-making power against the threat of Russia.
Over the last 4 years we have seen an explosion in defense spending in European countries, including Spain. All European countries have taken a very significant leap forward. Germany spends more than Great Britain in absolute terms. You have a good part of the Eastern European countries that are already spending 5%. Spain has tripled its defense spending in absolute terms in a few years, to give just a few figures. Well, an analysis of capabilities will be carried out.
Nicolás Pascual (EPP):“We cannot be waiting every four years to see who occupies the White House to know if Europe can defend itself”
I think it is correct, especially because beyond the fetish figures where we should place the emphasis is on how we develop the capabilities we need and how we develop European capabilities to have a deterrent force that is of a European character and to develop this European pillar of NATO.
Furthermore, NATO's and European partners' commitment to Ukraine has been reaffirmed in operational terms in recent months; also, Orbán's defeat in Hungary has allowed the desbloqueo of financial aid that was absolutely key for Ukraine. At the same time, we are seeing signs of vulnerability from the Kremlin that we had not seen in recent months. What we must do at the same time is remember that we want to play a role as Europeans in the event that a necessary negotiation is initiated to achieve a just and lasting peace in Ukraine.
Question: Is Europe really prepared to take over the US withdrawal?
Nicolás Pascual (EPP): It is not a question of detaching ourselves from the United States, it is a question of developing our own capabilities compatible with those of the United States and with other allies, such as Canada or Turkey.
In other words, what Europe has to do is equip itself with the necessary capabilities regardless of who is in the White House. We cannot be waiting every 4 years to see who will be the president of the United States and the positive or negative influence they will have on Europe's ability to defend itself.
We have to return to a normal situation, which is that Europe cannot delegate, nor outsource, its own defense to third countries. The 27 member states of the European Union are among the richest of the richest in the world. We have the capabilities to defend ourselves without depending on anyone. In the short term, we logically have to equip ourselves with what we lack, which is basically satellite intelligence and information, which is fundamental. Without it, it is impossible to maintain a conflict today, because you have neither ears nor eyes to see the enemy.
Javi López (S&D):“The United States has clearly and explicitly stated that its presence in Europe will decrease and we will have to fully take charge of our security”
It is also about the development capabilities of autonomous systems, unmanned vehicles, the famous drones and anti-drone systems, long-range precision artillery, logistics, in-flight refueling aircraft, eh those are the capabilities, let's say, eh strategic logistics that we lack. We are not going to do it all at once and in one fell swoop, but we have a period of time. I would say until the end of this decade, until 2030, to make possible and realize these gaps that we have in these strategic capabilities, but at the same time we must be able to insert these capabilities into a global strategy with respect to Russia. One thing is to have credible deterrence capabilities, which is what we are moving towards, another thing is the question, what are those capabilities for? And that debate should start now and I don't hear it in the European Union or even in NATO.
Javi López (S&D): Our capabilities must be at the service of a strategy, beyond completing and complementing them with the United States and not being dependent on key issues characteristic of the new type of warfare. We are talking about intelligence, satellites, drones, long-range artillery... The first step to having a strategy will be negotiation.
It should be clarified that being able to have dialogue is the way to have a seat at the table. We have been demanding for months that Europe have a seat at the negotiation of the major powers. That it be part of the negotiation, not the menu. This means talking to Russia.
Inevitably, to know what is wanted, with what objectives, with a clear mandate. Accepting in any case that we are not neutral in this conflict, we are a party that supports Ukraine, we defend it because we believe it is defending our cause, which is the cause of European values and international law.
Question: Do you fear possible fatigue in Western support for Ukraine?
Nicolás Pascual (EPP): If we realize the evolution of aid since the conflict began, currently we have widely surpassed the United States in economic terms, financial aid, but we have almost always surpassed the United States in financial aid since the beginning.
Financial aid that goes to two objectives, first to directly reinforce the Ukrainian budget and second to joint development programs. On the military level, however, the United States began by supporting more than us, because it had greater capabilities, but now even Europe has surpassed the United States in this area. Right now, Europe supports more than the United States in terms of financing and military matters.
It is a European problem and we have to get more involved than anyone. All aid from the United States is, of course, welcome, but what we have to approve are our aid packages and sanctions against Russia. But not only for the short term, but for the medium and long term, also taking into account that the cost of Ukraine's reconstruction will inevitably fall on the shoulders of the European Union and the United States. Recovering the funds used to pay for reconstruction would be desirable, but legally there will surely be problems. Right now, what we are applying are the interest on assets deposited by the Russian Central Bank in European financial institutions, not the capital.
The most important part of the reconstruction cost will fall into European hands and the best way to undertake it is by offering Ukraine a reasonable horizon of integration into the European Union.
Question: Ankara will also host a business forum with the main players in the sector. What are the barriers that currently prevent the European defense industry from taking off completely?
Javi López (S&D): We have a problem of European scale. By having a very fragmented defense market among twenty-seven major consumers, we end up having a very fragmented production and industry that is not capable of utilizing the efficiency that scale provides, which is something that the United States, evidently, uses with great intensity.
That is why it is important to combat fragmentation, it is a way to build European capabilities, it is a way to be more efficient in our eh spending and it is the way to develop a true European industrial base, right? Not national. There have already been warnings from the Defense Commissioner, Kubilius.
Javi López (S&D):“Our worst enemy is ourselves”
We do not see that the increase in spending in recent years is translating into a proportional increase in production as it should. And it has to do with scale, therefore, compacting our industry more, having joint purchases, having European capabilities, is the way to strengthen this European industry.
Question: The failure of the project for the so-called "European fighter jet" may have been an example of this.
Nicolás Pascual (EPP): It has clearly been a resounding failure. We must not hide the reality. It is especially painful because it was not only the European fighter jet, the combat air system that integrated the plans for an aircraft, but also complementary combat systems, such as drones, sensors, radars to create an entire small digital cloud that was going to be the sixth-generation aircraft in Europe.
It seems that it has basically failed because an agreement has not been reached on the distribution of the workload. France wanted the aircraft to respond to national tactical needs. Now we Spaniards and Germans have to see how we integrate into some European project. The possibility of joining the "joint air system" project led by the United Kingdom, Japan, and Italy is being considered.
Nicolás Pascual (EPP):“What we need to renew in Ankara is our transatlantic commitment, but strengthening an authentic European pillar of NATO”
Sweden is also approaching and we have already been taking common steps with the Germans. Six Spanish companies and eight German companies have agreed to start negotiations with a view to exploring the possibility of collaborating on that project.
Spain must commit to being at the forefront of any substitute project that has signs of short and medium-term viability.
Javi López (S&D): It is a reminder that our worst enemy is ourselves. In this case, a form of French nationalism has ended up boycotting a first-rate European project for European security and defense and for the development of our capabilities.
That is the reality, in its raw form.
And, secondly, all opportunities, spaces and instruments of integration at the European level that the current ecosystem allows us must be used to build European capabilities. Also in the industrial field, of course.
Question: Are we building a Europe of Defense or simply filling the gap left by others?
Nicolás Pascual (EPP): They are two sides of the same coin. We are building a Europe of defense because we need it, but, as we said before, also as a consequence of the war in Ukraine for four years and the partial decoupling of the United States from its commitments to European defense.
We are reacting to reality. Could we have done it before? Well, yes. Shouldn't we have waited for this conflict in Ukraine to react? Well, also.
But it's not worth crying over spilled milk, but rather trying to make up for lost time and react. There is a political will among all parliamentary groups, at least among the central groups of the European Parliament, to move forward with this construction of the Europe of defense. Now the question being debated is whether this transition will be an orderly or disorderly transition. It will be orderly if we can do it in agreement with the United States, in coherence with them, within NATO, creating what we said before: a powerful European pillar of defense.
Javi López (S&D): Trump and Putin are pushing Europe towards the end of the era of innocence. Towards strategic maturity and taking charge of our destiny. This means, first and foremost, taking full and autonomous responsibility. They have been external unifiers. It has happened before. There were others, some from the East, who strengthened European integration.
Now they are forcing us to take charge of our destiny, our security, and our defense. That is the current context and what circumstances are pushing us towards. We must be capable of ordering this strategic emancipation, which inevitably—not solely, but inevitably—involves taking charge of your security.
And not only that. Because when we talk about our security, we are talking about having a European defense and defense industry with European capabilities.
But we have not discussed today—and it would be enough for another interview—digital sovereignty and our enormous dependencies in the digital sphere, our industrial capabilities, especially in strategic areas of our economy, which remain dependencies that can be used as a weapon; our energy dependence... In all these areas, which are sources of dependence, we need to build our own capabilities. Probably the most sensitive of all is defense, especially the nuclear dimension, but there are many more layers and Europe must be capable of developing them in the coming years.
OFF the record
The conversation with Nicolás Pascual de la Parte and Javi López reflects that the debate on European defense has ceased to be a theoretical discussion and has become a matter of primary political and strategic importance. From different ideological positions, both agree on a fundamental diagnosis: Europe must strengthen its military capabilities, reduce its dependencies, and assume greater responsibility for its own security in a context marked by the war in Ukraine, the evolution of the transatlantic relationship, and the progressive withdrawal of the United States.
On the eve of the NATO summit in Ankara, the Alliance faces a new era in which strengthening the European pillar is no longer a future aspiration but an immediate necessity. The capacity of member states to translate this political consensus into investments, industrial integration, and strategic autonomy will set the course for European defense over the next decade.