The letter will be made public only today but its broad outline is already known. content. It sets the essential points of the new plan “Rearm“, brings the company of the President of the Commission Ursula von der Leyen and will be sent today to the Member States in view of the extraordinary EU summit next Thursday, which will also be attended by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
“We are working hard to the preparation of the European Council together with President Antonio Costa", said von der Leyen, explaining that "we have need for a massive increase in defense, without a doubt”. The president reiterated that “we want lasting peace, but lasting peace can only be built on strength. And that means starting by strengthening ourselves. That is the purpose of the plan that I will present to the member states”. It includes economies of scale, forms of rationalization and partnerships between member states and also a fund created with common debt.
“Queen Ursula” Wants to Extend Brussels’ Power
Le European capitals They fear, however, that Commission President von der Leyen will exploit this crisis to extend the powers of Brussels to new areas and strengthen its influence on national governments as during the Covid-19 pandemic when vaccine purchases were managed by Brussels. A centralizing approach that has earned it the nickname “Queen Ursula”. Some EU leaders don't want that this will happen again on a sensitive issue like defense spending. “Defense is still largely a national responsibility,” diplomatic sources said, explaining the opposition to a defense fund managed by the Commission. In particular, countries like Poland and the Finlandia want to protect the defense from the Commission's attempts at interference.
Defense, here is the “Rearm” plan in 5 points
The plan in five points von der Leyen's proposal, set out in the letter sent to the heads of state and government of the Twenty-seven in view of the extraordinary summit on Thursday, should mobilise 800 billion euros in total.
Il first point of the plan is the activation of the national safeguard clause of the Stability Pact to allow member states to spend on defense even if they exceed 3% of the deficit. “If member states increased their defense spending by 1,5% of GDP on average, this could create fiscal space of around 650 billion euros over a period of four years,” he explained.
Il second point is a new instrument to provide €150 billion in loans to member states for defense investments. “It’s basically about spending better and spending together. We are talking about pan-European capability domains,” encouraging joint purchases to save money and also allowing for increased supplies of military equipment to Ukraine.
Il third point: flexibility in the European budget to allow those states that wish to use Cohesion Policy programmes to increase defence spending.
- last two points aim to mobilise private capital by accelerating the Savings and Investment Union and through the European Investment Bank.
Defense, the mechanisms of the plan
Il “Rearm” plan in the first draft of the conclusions of Thursday's summit recalls the Versailles Declaration of March 2022 and the fact that the EU must become more "sovereign" and more "responsible" of its own defence. The Commission is asked to propose “further sources of defence funding at EU level, including through additional flexibility in the use of structural funds, and to rapidly present proposals in this regard”. The conclusions state that the Union should “accelerate” the mobilization of the instruments needed to finance the investments that will need to be made. The need for EU states to “substantially” increase defense spending is stressed and, for this reason, the Commission is invited to recommend a way to use the “flexibilities” of the Stability Pact to eliminate defense spending.
Von der Leyen explained that this mechanism will be applied “in a controlled and conditional manner” to prevent uncontrolled spending by highly indebted countries. But the most rigorous states such as Germany and Netherlands, and the great military powers such as the Greece, they want to limit the emergency clause to countries that already spend more than 2% of their gross domestic product on defense, as an incentive for others to reach that goal. The idea does not please states that have not reached 2%, such as Italy and Spain.
Reference is then made to the financing options: the Board of Governors of the European Investment Bank (EIB) is asked to adapt “urgently” financing practices for defence Europe, in particular by “re-evaluating the list of excluded activities”. By adopting the ESG standards (Environmental, Social, Governance, ed.), defense is now excluded from. They are then identified “priority” areas to act at EU level in terms of military capabilities. In accordance with the work already carried out by the European Defence Agency and in “full coherence” with NATO, we focus on “aircraft and missile defense systems; artillery systems; missiles and munitions; drones and anti-drone systems; strategic enablers (such as tankers, air tankers) and protection of critical infrastructure, including in relation to space; military mobility; cybernetics; artificial intelligence and electronic warfare”.
The importance of using the "more systematically" is then underlined.demand aggregation, the harmonization of the requirements and joint purchases” in the field of defence. The Commission, the Council and the Parliament are asked to simplify procurement procedures, to eliminate the "bottlenecks" that still "hinder rapid growth of the defence industry". The EU executive is recommended to give priority to a Omnibus measure for defense. A stronger EU is “complementary” to NATO and “will contribute positively to transatlantic and global security. The Commission is also urged to take these priorities into account in the next Mff, the EU's multiannual budgetary framework (2028-2034). The European Council, in this case too, will return to these issues both in the March and June Councils, especially after the shock caused by the Trump administration's new posture on Ukraine.
The March 6 summit
Il summit on Thursday it will be opened by one “exchange of views” with the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky who, after being kicked out of the White House last Friday following a clash on live television with President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance, was received in London on Sunday by European leaders with full honours. About Ukraine the EU “remains committed to providing increased political, financial, economic, humanitarian, military and diplomatic support”. Because a Ukraine “capable of defending itself is an integral part of any future security guarantee”.
Finally there is decide the fate of Russian funds held in European banks. This is approximately 200 billion euros held in the Euroclear financial institution based in Brussels that is earning a lot of interest. The United States holds only $5 billion. The seizure of these assets would be a drastic option that would almost certainly guarantee Europe a bigger seat at the negotiating table, after the United States and the Kremlin ruled out the opportunity in recent talks in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. However, the EU governments remain divided on whether unfreezing those funds would show Trump that Brussels still has some strength, or whether it would backfire on them. With frozen Russian assets “we can replace the US support if the US decides not to support Ukraine anyway,” Estonia’s foreign minister said Monday Margus Tsakhna.
“We have 300 billion euros of frozen Russian assets in Europe and we need to use them,” Tsahkna told reporters in Brussels, alongside his counterparts from Denmark, Sweden, Lithuania and Latvia. The Baltic and Nordic countries, Russia's neighbors, think that the money should be delivered immediately to Ukraine. This position is supported by Poland, the Czech Republic and the EU's top diplomat, former Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas. In opposite field France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen who fear that By confiscating the funds, the EU would scare away international investors and would give up its greatest advantage in the peace talks.
