Apr 24, 2025 10:52 PM
https://theins.ru/en/politics/280877
EXCERPTS: On April 10, at NATO headquarters in Brussels, representatives of the so-called “coalition of the willing” gathered for another meeting. This informal alliance of mostly European countries is composed of states that have voiced their readiness to deploy troops to Ukraine after a peace agreement is reached.
Led by France and the UK, the project increasingly appears poised to evolve into a pan-European armed force — potentially Europe's long-term response to the foreign policy unpredictability of the United States. Still, in the event of a direct military confrontation with Russia, going into battle without U.S. support would be difficult: Europe currently lacks carrier strike groups, cruise missile launch platforms, and long-range radar systems.
While the U.S. continues to engage in peace negotiations with Ukraine and Russia, Europe is working to define its own role in shaping what will likely become the future security architecture of the region for decades to come.
[...] A reduced U.S. role in Europe’s security architecture would inevitably lead to a transformation of NATO and a rethinking of the EU’s own military capacity. Discussions are already underway about downsizing and relocating U.S. forces in Europe, including a possible withdrawal of half of the 20,000 troops stationed near the border with Ukraine.
There are differing views among NATO and EU members, and some officials have floated the idea of a new format — akin to the European Defence Community (EDC) proposed in 1952 but never ratified, as NATO ultimately absorbed its functions. Today, the “coalition of the willing” and the Ukraine Defense Contact Group may evolve into the foundations of a European defense structure independent of the U.S. and NATO.
On paper, European armies collectively number about 1.5 million troops (excluding Turkey). In reality, Europe remains deeply dependent on U.S. military power in critical areas.
Only France and the UK have carrier strike groups, and even those are far less capable than those of the U.S. Without American sea-launched platforms like Tomahawk missiles, Europe has very few alternatives — either submarine- or surface-based — for cruise missile deployment. Anti-submarine warfare capabilities, coastal defense systems, and long-range radar detection are all severely limited. Europe would also face major challenges in intelligence gathering on Russian ballistic missile launches. Nuclear deterrence would also become an urgent question if U.S. guarantees are no longer seen as binding — whether under Trump or a like-minded successor.
Regardless of size or mandate, the deployment of a European military contingent to Ukraine would be historically significant. A mission carried out without U.S. involvement — or even against the wishes of the sitting U.S. administration — could be the first step on the way to a truly independent European armed force.
Military analysts estimate that in the event of an open war with Russia, Europe would need the support of approximately 300,000 American troops — around 50 heavy brigades, with thousands of tanks, armored vehicles, and artillery systems. If that guarantee is no longer assured, Europe will need to build such a capability on its own — integrated from the start into unified command and logistics systems.
Such a deployment in Ukraine could become the basis for building a future European Army, independent from the U.S. and capable of defending the continent. But achieving such an outcome will require years of planning and the development of a robust defense industry... (MORE - missing details)
EXCERPTS: On April 10, at NATO headquarters in Brussels, representatives of the so-called “coalition of the willing” gathered for another meeting. This informal alliance of mostly European countries is composed of states that have voiced their readiness to deploy troops to Ukraine after a peace agreement is reached.
Led by France and the UK, the project increasingly appears poised to evolve into a pan-European armed force — potentially Europe's long-term response to the foreign policy unpredictability of the United States. Still, in the event of a direct military confrontation with Russia, going into battle without U.S. support would be difficult: Europe currently lacks carrier strike groups, cruise missile launch platforms, and long-range radar systems.
While the U.S. continues to engage in peace negotiations with Ukraine and Russia, Europe is working to define its own role in shaping what will likely become the future security architecture of the region for decades to come.
[...] A reduced U.S. role in Europe’s security architecture would inevitably lead to a transformation of NATO and a rethinking of the EU’s own military capacity. Discussions are already underway about downsizing and relocating U.S. forces in Europe, including a possible withdrawal of half of the 20,000 troops stationed near the border with Ukraine.
There are differing views among NATO and EU members, and some officials have floated the idea of a new format — akin to the European Defence Community (EDC) proposed in 1952 but never ratified, as NATO ultimately absorbed its functions. Today, the “coalition of the willing” and the Ukraine Defense Contact Group may evolve into the foundations of a European defense structure independent of the U.S. and NATO.
On paper, European armies collectively number about 1.5 million troops (excluding Turkey). In reality, Europe remains deeply dependent on U.S. military power in critical areas.
Only France and the UK have carrier strike groups, and even those are far less capable than those of the U.S. Without American sea-launched platforms like Tomahawk missiles, Europe has very few alternatives — either submarine- or surface-based — for cruise missile deployment. Anti-submarine warfare capabilities, coastal defense systems, and long-range radar detection are all severely limited. Europe would also face major challenges in intelligence gathering on Russian ballistic missile launches. Nuclear deterrence would also become an urgent question if U.S. guarantees are no longer seen as binding — whether under Trump or a like-minded successor.
Regardless of size or mandate, the deployment of a European military contingent to Ukraine would be historically significant. A mission carried out without U.S. involvement — or even against the wishes of the sitting U.S. administration — could be the first step on the way to a truly independent European armed force.
Military analysts estimate that in the event of an open war with Russia, Europe would need the support of approximately 300,000 American troops — around 50 heavy brigades, with thousands of tanks, armored vehicles, and artillery systems. If that guarantee is no longer assured, Europe will need to build such a capability on its own — integrated from the start into unified command and logistics systems.
Such a deployment in Ukraine could become the basis for building a future European Army, independent from the U.S. and capable of defending the continent. But achieving such an outcome will require years of planning and the development of a robust defense industry... (MORE - missing details)
