The defense and security of Europe in the future

European Defense and Security in a Shifting Geopolitical Landscape

In the evolving geopolitical context, European leaders are grappling with the dual challenge of ensuring economic development and addressing defense and security concerns. The recently published compendium delves into key aspects such as talent, supply chains, innovation, and climate change in the realm of European defense and security.

As Europe navigates this landscape, efficiency and effectiveness in defense and security are paramount. The ongoing war in Ukraine and the 75th anniversary of NATO's creation underscore the need for adaptation to this new reality. Balancing defense priorities is crucial, requiring government stakeholders at various levels to make strategic decisions on resource allocation. Europe faces dilemmas in allocating funding effectively, necessitating trade-offs between replenishing critical supplies, investing in modernizing equipment fleets, increasing equipment availability, incentivizing innovation in the defense supply base, and integrating new technologies into armed forces. Striking the right balance is essential to protect citizens' lives and livelihoods while enabling investments in other crucial areas like education, technology, healthcare, and the transition to a net-zero economy. The compendium serves as a valuable resource for understanding and navigating these complex challenges in European defense and security.

The Future of European Security and Defense Policies

The TEPSA Academy 2022 on the European Union’s (EU) Security and Defence Policies has produced valuable recommendations for the future of the European Security and Defence Agenda. The current geopolitical landscape, shaped by Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine, marks a crucial moment for addressing past shortcomings and envisioning new solutions to ensure European security, respect for the international legal order, and the preservation of the European peace project.

The recommendations include:

Developing the Strategic Compass into a comprehensive, proactive, and ambitious European Security and Defence Strategy, addressing present and future threats across all domains. Avoiding complete dependence on NATO and diversifying and reinforcing security cooperation both bilaterally and through inter-regional arrangements. Balancing security policies with fundamental values, ensuring transparency, and involving EU citizens in decision-making processes related to military and civilian missions.
Continuing to develop tailored approaches to security issues using flexible methods such as qualified majority voting or differentiated integration.

Including the Green Deal and environmental mainstreaming in a broader human security conception, recognizing climate change as an accelerator of conflict. Ensuring an inclusive approach, bringing diverse groups to the table in conflict resolution, coordinating the use of environmental and gender concepts, and diversifying and strengthening supply chains for strategic autonomy in defense and the green transition. These recommendations provide a roadmap for the EU in navigating complex challenges and shaping a resilient and effective security and defense framework.

Shifting Geopolitical Realities: Navigating the Post-Russia-Ukraine Conflict Era in Euro-Atlantic Security

The ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine has fundamentally altered the geopolitical landscape and shattered the illusion of a security community extending from Vancouver to Vladivostok. The post-Cold War 'European security order' faces significant challenges, and a return to the pre-war situation seems unlikely. The war has exposed a fault line, separating the Euro-Atlantic space from what lies east of it, with a revanchist nationalist Russia pursuing aggressive strategies.

In the West, protecting democracy and the 'open society' is a key test, while in the East, authoritarian stability appears fragile, especially considering Russia's failing military adventure. The economic attractiveness of the Russian market is diminishing, and post-Soviet regions are increasingly pulled either westward towards the European market or eastward towards China. The conflict may lead to growing instability within Russia and disintegration within the post-Soviet space.

In response to these challenges, the focus should be on renewing and strengthening a Euro-Atlantic community centered around NATO but not overly reliant on the US. The conflict has reaffirmed NATO's irreplaceable role in collective defense, and transatlantic unity has been bolstered. While the EU has made strategic strides, especially in imposing sanctions against Moscow, terminating dependence on Russian fossil fuels, and reviving European enlargement, it remains more of a strategic than a security or military actor.

The EU's accession process, if managed politically and preserving its criteria-based nature, could be a key security policy tool. However, becoming a more independent military actor will take time, and the EU will face a capability and technological deficit, making cooperation with Washington crucial. Transatlantic dependence risks should be recognized, emphasizing the importance of reinforcing the 'European pillar' of transatlantic defense. As the US focuses on strategic competition with China, growing transatlantic strategic interdependence, rather than strategic autonomy, suggests a path where the EU assumes a larger responsibility for European security, while NATO continues to provide the foundation for transatlantic defense.

NATO has undertaken significant measures to bolster its response to cyber threats, acknowledging the critical role that cybersecurity plays in the modern threat landscape. The establishment of the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence (CCDCOE) in 2008 signifies a hub of expertise dedicated to cyber defense within the alliance. This center conducts research, training, and exercises to enhance NATO's collective capabilities in addressing cyber threats. In 2016, NATO leaders made a pivotal Cyber Defense Pledge, signaling the alliance's commitment to treating cyber threats with the same gravity as traditional military threats. This pledge acknowledges that a cyberattack could trigger the collective defense clause of Article 5 of the NATO treaty.

Crucially, NATO has integrated cyberspace as a domain of operations alongside land, sea, and air, underscoring its commitment to addressing threats in the digital realm. Cybersecurity considerations are now seamlessly woven into NATO's defense planning and strategy. To fortify its ability to respond to cyber incidents effectively, NATO has developed a Cyber Incident Response Capability (CIRC). This capability coordinates with member states and other entities, facilitating information-sharing and collective responses to cyber threats.

Regular cyber defense exercises further showcase NATO's commitment to honing its capabilities collaboratively. These exercises involve not only member states but also partner nations and private sector entities, creating a comprehensive approach to simulating and responding to realistic cyber threats. However, NATO faces challenges, notably in attributing cyberattacks, where identifying the precise source can be complex. The alliance is actively working on mechanisms for attribution and ensuring accountability for responsible parties.

Additionally, NATO is dedicated to building the cybersecurity capacities of its member states, recognizing that a resilient alliance hinges on robust national cybersecurity measures.

As technology continues to advance, NATO remains vigilant in adapting to emerging technologies like artificial intelligence and quantum computing, recognizing that these developments may present both challenges and opportunities in the ever-evolving cyber domain.

In conclusion, NATO's response to cyber threats exemplifies a comprehensive and collaborative strategy, but ongoing adaptation to new challenges is imperative in the dynamic landscape of cybersecurity.

NATO underscores the imperative of bolstering cybersecurity capacities within its member states, recognizing that individual national resilience is foundational to the collective strength of the alliance. The organization's multifaceted approach involves prioritizing information sharing and collaboration among member states, facilitating the exchange of intelligence on emerging threats and lessons learned from cyber incidents.

Moreover, NATO actively supports training and education programs to elevate the skills of cybersecurity professionals, encompassing technical, strategic, and policy aspects. Technical assistance is extended to member states to fortify their cybersecurity measures, encompassing the establishment of national-level response teams and an overall enhancement of cybersecurity posture. Collaborative efforts with member states in policy and strategy development ensure alignment with NATO's overarching objectives, incorporating best practices and regulatory guidance. Cybersecurity exercises and simulations, often involving member states, are conducted to assess and refine national response capabilities in the face of diverse threat scenarios.

Resource allocation guidance is provided to member states, acknowledging the critical role of investment in technology, personnel, and infrastructure in fostering a robust cybersecurity posture. Challenges include addressing diverse national capacities, emphasizing private sector engagement, adapting to emerging threats, and harmonizing legal and regulatory frameworks to collectively fortify cybersecurity objectives. The dynamic nature of the cyber threat landscape necessitates an ongoing and adaptable approach in NATO's capacity-building endeavors.

Counterterrorism efforts in Europe have evolved to address dynamic threats, ranging from organized group attacks to lone-wolf and homegrown extremism. Key components include intelligence-sharing through organizations like Europol, joint task forces, and international collaboration. Addressing radicalization involves community engagement, education, and rehabilitation programs. Europe collaborates globally, particularly with the US and Middle Eastern nations, to counter terrorist networks. Cybersecurity measures focus on monitoring online radicalization, with cooperation from tech companies.

In border security, advanced technologies, intelligence-sharing, and joint operations are crucial to prevent terrorist movement across borders. Migration challenges are tackled through addressing root causes, fostering regional stability, and implementing comprehensive border control measures within the EU framework. Fair and humane asylum and refugee policies are sought, emphasizing coordination and capacity-building in border countries. The comprehensive strategy recognizes the importance of international cooperation and partnerships with organizations like the United Nations for long-term solutions to migration challenges.

Europe faces the intricate task of balancing security and humanitarian values in its asylum and refugee policies amid global conflicts and crises. The Common European Asylum System (CEAS) seeks harmonization but encounters challenge due to differing national interests and migration pressures. Security concerns prompt enhanced border controls, while upholding humanitarian values involves dignified treatment and fair procedures for asylum seekers.

EU emphasizes cooperation and burden-sharing to address the uneven distribution of asylum seekers, including mechanisms like relocation. Externalization of migration policies involves agreements with neighboring regions to manage migration outside European borders. The 2020 European Migration and Asylum Pact aimed for a balanced approach with elements like flexible solidarity, fair asylum procedures, strengthened border management, and partnerships with third countries.

However, the pact's implementation faced hurdles due to divergent member state views on responsibilities and mandatory relocation. Disagreements on security, humanitarian considerations, and migration pressures complicated negotiations. Striking a balance between security and humanitarianism remains a formidable challenge in the ongoing efforts to formulate a cohesive and effective European asylum and refugee policy.