LAST WEEK, French President Emmanuel Macron talked about the possibility of forming a pan-European army under the auspices of the European Union (EU). Macron hinted that this new army will be used to safeguard European interests against the three most powerful countries in the world, namely Russia, China and the United States.
Apparently this idea came about because of US President Trump’s criticisms with regards to NATO, as well as his recent decision to withdraw the US from the INF treaty. Macron said: “When I see President Trump announcing that he’s quitting a major disarmament treaty which was formed after the 1980s euro-missile crisis that hit Europe, who is the main victim? Europe and its security.”
Now, there are a lot of subtexts in this brief statement. First, Macron is anticipating the obsolescence and possible abolishment of NATO. Secondly, he is trying to shore up the soft power of the European Union (EU) by giving it some hard power. And thirdly, his statement implies that the European continent will face a “crisis” sometime in the future.
Reactions to Monsieur President’s statements have been mixed. US President Trump didn’t like it. In one tweet, he described Macron’s idea as “very insulting” before reiterating his earlier point that NATO’s European members should pay their membership dues.
In contrast, Russian President Vladimir Putin seemed to like the idea, stating that “it is quite natural that it (the EU) wants to be independent, self-sufficient and sovereign in matters of defense and security.”
Now, why would Putin want to endorse the formation of a Pan-European Army? It’s because he hopes to break up the NATO alliance. An EU army will make US presence in Europe redundant, which is to say it will make NATO redundant. Putin most likely thinks that it would be better for Russia to have the US and EU as two separate entities rather than as a united coalition.
And if Trump decides to play nice with Putin, and create a new Russian-US partnership? Well, that’s going to put the EU (as well as other US allies and rivals) in an even more interesting position.
Now, all this is still largely academic for the moment. For all of Macron’s talk about creating a pan-European army, most of it is still just talk at this point.
Yes, European member states can easily build up their military strength in a pinch, and they can easily build up their own nukes easily, but creating unified EU army is a different matter. Not only will this help boost support for EU skeptic parties in the continent, a Pan-European army will be seen by many European member states, particularly the Eastern European ones, as a police force meant to control their sovereignty rather than as an actual military body. Consequently, these countries will try to block any funding or recruitment that serves the creation of this hypothetical army, further causing problems for the people trying to create it.
However, the biggest flaw behind an EU army is that (assuming it does get built) it will take its orders from the EU, an organization that was set up around soft-power, and which relied on US military power for all its hard power needs. The EU was not built to fight wars or create armies. It’s an economic union that is trying to become a political union (with little to no success). So if Macron really wants a pan-European army, he should start by abolishing the EU then replace it with something a little more martial in nature./PN
