A major land war has been raging in Eastern Europe for two years. For two years, Europeans have been talking about the need to “ramp up” their defense industries in order to supply Ukraine with weapons and ammunition and to replenish their own arsenals. And for two years, Brussels has been thinking about what role the EU should play in this ramp-up, delivery and filling.
To put it cautiously, the balance sheet is meager. “Despite all the lip service, not a cent has flowed from the EU to date,” say arms industry circles. There is an EU budget called the European Peace Facility. This allows states that transfer military equipment from their national stocks to Ukraine to have part of the costs reimbursed. But when it comes to jointly placed and financed orders for new weapons and new ammunition or the promotion of the expansion of European defense capacities with EU money – things that have been repeatedly announced in Brussels for months – almost nothing has happened so far.
Europe wants to be able to defend itself
That should change. As the current and presumably future EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has announced, from autumn onwards there will be an EU Commissioner for Defense who will explicitly ensure that Europe has enough weapons to help Ukraine and itself to be able to defend ourselves against Russia even in an emergency. So far, this portfolio has been divided: Defense falls under the responsibility of both Internal Market Commissioner Thierry Breton and that of Foreign Affairs Officer Josep Borrell, to whom the European Defense Agency (EDA) reports.
You won’t find anyone in Brussels who finds the idea of a defense commissioner really wrong. Europe’s deficiencies in arms production are as blatant as they are well known. “We called for a defense commissioner to be appointed months ago,” says a European diplomat.
However, there are many observers who warn that the appointment of a new commissioner alone will not solve a single problem and could prove to be a charade. “A commissioner who has no powers and cannot dispose of money is pointless,” says foreign and security politician Hannah Neumann, who sits in the European Parliament for the German Greens.
Debt brake as a security risk?
In Neumann’s opinion, a European defense commissioner would only be effective if the member states handed over some previously jealously guarded national responsibilities to Brussels: Firstly, the decision about which weapons should be purchased together so that “every country does not compete against every other on the market” . On the other hand, the EU would have to decide based on strategic considerations which country gets which material. “Ammunition, for example, must go to Ukraine and the eastern flank first,” says Neumann.
And thirdly, it must be ensured that there is enough money, said Neumann. For this reason, Internal Market Commissioner Breton has already proposed setting up a 100 billion euro fund from which the EU should finance joint arms procurement and production. However, given the empty public coffers in Europe, it remains to be seen whether this will happen. The federal government, for example, would then have to consider whether the German debt brake is tenable. “This is developing into a security risk for Europe’s citizens,” says Neumann.
The practical benefits of a defense commissioner are also viewed with skepticism in industrial circles. It is said that no state wants to forego sovereignty in an area as fundamental as defense. Diplomats confirm this view: Defense is a matter for the member states, not the Commission, says a government representative. At most, a larger role for the Brussels authority is conceivable in arms matters. And we also have to look closely at what powers the new commissioner should be given – beyond the label “defense”, which now sounds good in election campaign times.
He is considered technically suitable should a defense commissioner be needed: Poland’s Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski (right), here with EU Foreign Affairs Representative Josep Borrell.
(Photo: Dominika Zarzycka/Sopa/Zuma Press Wire/dpa)
The EU’s attempt last year to procure hundreds of thousands of artillery shells for Ukraine for one billion euros through framework contracts between the EDA and European arms companies for one billion euros is cited in Brussels as a very sobering example of how diligently EU governments protect their sovereignty over defense . The bottom line is that only around 50,000 rounds were purchased this way. Several EU governments, including Germany’s, preferred to forego European subsidies and order directly from industry rather than involve the EDA, which was considered too cumbersome and bureaucratic. Experts do not expect this behavior to change just because a European Commissioner for Defense is appointed. The framework agreements concluded by the EDA have now expired without the Europeans having even come close to Russia’s production level of four million rounds per year for artillery ammunition.
Speculation about a possible candidate from Poland
Of course, Brussels wouldn’t be Brussels if there weren’t already personnel speculation about a new high-ranking office, even before the usefulness and structure have been finally clarified. And so a name is already circulating as to who could become the new defense commissioner: Radek Sikorski, former defense and current foreign minister of Poland, and a member of the European Parliament.
Sikorski is certainly extremely technically qualified for the position, say people who know him. As a representative of a country on the eastern edge of the EU that is familiar with the direct threat from Russia, he is probably doubly suitable. Von der Leyen has also indicated that she would like to fill the position with someone from eastern central Europe.
However, during his time as an MEP, Sikorski earned hundreds of thousands of euros a year advising non-European governments and corporations in addition to his parliamentary work. Among his clients were the United Arab Emirates. As far as we know, Sikorski’s activity was completely legal. But it could bring back unpleasant memories in the EU Parliament, which would have to approve his appointment as commissioner, of the money flows between MEPs and Qatar, the discovery of which triggered a massive scandal at the end of 2022.
But there is no shortage of ambitious Eastern Europeans who would like to swap their positions at home for a high foreign or security policy position in Brussels. Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas is ready, as are Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis and his Latvian colleague Krišjānis Kariņš. “Filling the new commissioner’s office,” as one diplomat put it, “will be much easier than solving Europe’s arms problems.”