Borrell urges France and Germany to lead the creation of a European defense outside the EU.

BarcelonaThe president of CIDOB (National Council of People's Commissars) and former High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs, Josep Borrell, has said that a common defense within the European Union is "unimaginable," as it is an issue that would require unanimity. "There will never be unanimity to build a NATO of the European Union or a European Defense Union," he stated during his speech at the annual meeting of the Círculo de Economía (Economic Circle). However, he considered it essential to strengthen European defense and urged countries willing to move in this direction to join outside the community club.

"My advice would be to stop looking for a solution where it doesn't exist. And if there is a group of European states that wants to build a defense EU, they should do so with a new intergovernmental treaty, as we did to save the euro," Borrell said. He recalled that after the 2008 financial crisis, a treaty was "invented" outside the EU "to create the mechanisms to prevent the collapse of the euro because there was no unanimity." "If some countries believe it's necessary to create a pan-European defense capability, let them start working, let them create it with a treaty that determines who, how, and why," he added. He argued that the European Commission can provide funding, but that "command and control should be done by the military," because Brussels has no jurisdiction over defense.

In this regard, Borrell referred to the European Commission's announcement to mobilize 650 billion euros over four years to rearm Europe, and warned that this will mean "throwing money away" if it is not done in a coordinated manner. "We will increase the 27 armies, each one to its own size and condition, and we will continue to have duplicate capabilities, the same gaps "of things we don't have, and an ineffective conglomerate," he summarized. "If we're worried about Europe's defense, let those who want to do it do it, like Germany. But stop wrapping the skein around it," he concluded.

Remodeling NATO

In any case, Borrell expressed his conviction that Europe must react to Donald Trump's unpredictability and that NATO must "remodel itself" because "for the United States, this [NATO] is a thing of the past." He summarized four possible scenarios for Washington's commitment to the Atlantic Alliance for the near future: "one bad, another worse, another terrible, and a fourth palatable."

A bad scenario would be a "chaotic withdrawal" of the United States from Europe, because this would mean losing "the most important asset: the interoperability of militaries," that is, the disintegration of the Alliance's command in a disorderly manner. Even worse, in his opinion, would be a "neither with you nor without you" scenario, that is, the United States maintaining a presence in Europe but without the commitment to act in defense of any partner under attack, in compliance with Article 5 of the NATO Treaty. "With Trump at the helm, it's better not to trust it," he said.

The best scenario, according to Borrell, would be for the United States to continue to guarantee air, nuclear, and satellite coverage, while Europe would be responsible for "conventional" defense. However, he stressed that replacing the US territorial deployment in Europe (100,000 soldiers) would entail an enormous effort: equipping 50 brigades (around 200,000 additional soldiers) and increasing defense spending by €250 billion per year. But he considered that, although expensive, "it is undoubtedly necessary." "It's better to start today, because it has to be done," he warned. "In concrete terms, that's what should be done. Everything else is blah, blah, blah."

Finally, he considered that the worst scenario of all would be an agreement between the United States and Russia, "which would sacrifice Europe." Therefore, he stressed the need to maintain support for Ukraine: "What happens in Ukraine will determine the geopolitical balance." "Be careful not to think that Ukraine can be allowed to fall, because if it falls, it can drag us down," he said.

Support for Ukraine

Asked what Europe could do if Washington withdrew its support for Kiev, Borrell replied: "First of all, we must think about whether we can continue doing what we do, which would already be a lot." He said the EU could increase financial support for Ukraine, but that it could not replace the military aid provided by the United States. "From a strictly financial point of view, it shouldn't be a problem, because in terms of our GDP we should be able to afford it. The problem is that soldiers don't fight with banknotes, but with weapons," he summarized, lamenting that Europe has a problem with military industrial capacity.

"Factories must reopen, and the manufacturer will produce if there is demand," he said, adding that in Europe, weapons are purchased by governments. Companies "must ensure that they will have a reasonable expectation of viability," he said, insisting that it is necessary for the demanders, i.e., governments, "to organize themselves."