With the US’ commitment to upholding its European allies’ security in serious doubt, and revisionist powers like China and Russia increasingly emboldened, the EU is scrambling to strengthen its capacity to defend itself. However, this effort could be thwarted by a fundamental paradox: While Europeans cherish peace, they largely lack the resolve to fight for it.
A recent report highlights the scale of this disconnect. Although half of young people in France, Germany and Spain, as well as the UK, expect armed conflict within a decade, only one-third would fight to defend their countries. Across the EU, only 32 percent of adults say they would be willing to take up arms, including just 23 percent of Germans and 14 percent of Italians.
The problem is not simply that Europeans have embraced pacifism. Rather, the EU is beset by a dangerous complacency: Decades of reliance on the US have fostered a widespread belief that security is guaranteed, not earned. However, US President Donald Trump’s administration has made it clear that Europe can no longer count on the US to defend it. With security threats proliferating — exemplified by Russia’s war in Ukraine and China’s saber-rattling in the Indo-Pacific region — Europe must cultivate a collective will to fight.
Illustration: Yusha
If this effort is to safeguard, and even strengthen, European democracies, it must be rooted not in aggressive nationalism — which creates fertile ground for anti-democratic forces to thrive — but in a sense of civic duty and economic pragmatism. This is not about militarizing society, but about empowering it to defend itself, thereby upholding the freedom, stability and prosperity that Europeans so value.
The first step is for Europe to rethink its approach to military engagement. Conscription, while effective in Scandinavia or the Baltics, will not work in every European context. Instead, governments should introduce flexible, accessible military-training programs — think short-term courses on cybersecurity, drone operation or survival skills — that double as pathways to employment.
With some countries, such as Sweden and Spain, having 25 percent of youth unemployed or underemployed, linking military service to certifications in high-demand fields like engineering or logistics could enhance its appeal substantially, particularly to voters who value upward mobility.
Such initiatives should also capitalize on the interests of young Europeans, not least their enthusiasm for military-themed video games that resemble war simulations. Pilot programs in Estonia, where cyberdefense training has bolstered both security and tech employment, offer a useful model.
Fostering sustained support for increased military spending — including for the European Commission’s welcome initiative to unlock trillions of euros that are sitting idle in savings accounts — will require a similar reframing. The traditional “guns versus butter” framework, which pits security against social-welfare spending, is not only alienating; it is also wrong. Far from eroding Europe’s economic well-being, investment in defense would bolster a powerful engine of growth and prosperity.
The EU’s defense sector already employs more than 500,000 people and generates at least 150 billion euros (US$171 billion) annually. The success of companies like Germany’s Rheinmetall, whose stock price has doubled since the beginning of the year, shows just how profitable security investments can be.
However, changing the narrative about military spending will require more than communicating facts; policies that directly link defense to people’s social and economic well-being are essential. For example, governments could introduce subsidies for military families or tax breaks for defense-sector workers.
Moreover, innovative financial instruments — such as “national freedom bonds” (with guaranteed returns) or an exchange-traded fund for European defense (with similar guarantees) — could mobilize domestic capital, while giving citizens a greater stake in their own security while earning some profit. France’s social bonds and Italy’s tax-advantaged savings instruments show how this can work. Applying this model of profitable patriotism to defense could raise billions of euros.
All of this will require political leadership, with Europe’s mainstream parties championing military preparedness not as a show of aggression, but as a bulwark for freedom and the rule of law in open societies. Unfortunately, European liberals are still clinging to the “anti-politics” mindset once championed by the likes of the late Czech dissident-turned-president Vaclav Havel.
While this approach was appropriate in the fight against communism, it is hampering Europe’s ability to confront the threats of today, while enabling populists who flirt with appeasement to gain ground. Public figures, educators, and the media must also contribute to fostering the necessary shift in mindset.
Europe’s security landscape is changing fast. To navigate it effectively, the EU must integrate defense into a broader pro-democracy agenda in which military service is a practical, appealing option for young people, defense spending is linked to economic well-being, and political leaders make a compelling case for military preparedness. Without such a push, the world’s revisionist powers would increasingly dictate the terms of engagement, and the vision of a peaceful, stable and united Europe would fade into history.
Wojciech Przybylski, editor of Visegrad Insight and president of the Res Publica Foundation in Warsaw, is an advisory board member at the LSE IDEAS Ratiu Forum and the European Forum for New Ideas, and a Europe’s futures fellow at the Institute for Human Sciences. Goran Buldioski is a senior fellow at the Hertie School in Berlin.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
On the eve of the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe (VE) Day, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) made a statement that provoked unprecedented repudiations among the European diplomats in Taipei. Chu said during a KMT Central Standing Committee meeting that what President William Lai (賴清德) has been doing to the opposition is equivalent to what Adolf Hitler did in Nazi Germany, referencing ongoing investigations into the KMT’s alleged forgery of signatures used in recall petitions against Democratic Progressive Party legislators. In response, the German Institute Taipei posted a statement to express its “deep disappointment and concern”
RSS