This editorial critically examines the European Union’s rearmament agenda, framed by the Commission’s Readiness 2030 plan and the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) Regulation, in response to geopolitical threats and possible US disengagement. While EU leaders present military investment as essential for safeguarding the ‘European way of life’, the measures proposed reveal a deep disjunction between rhetoric and reality. The plan falls short of establishing genuine strategic autonomy, as NATO remains central and procurement from US industries is reinforced, undermining the claim of independence. Moreover, by relying primarily on national spending and only modest EU financial instruments, the initiative risks entrenching asymmetries between Member States, strengthening national military–industrial complexes rather than building a coordinated European defence framework. By the same token, the legal dimension is equally fraught: the selective use of (national) escape clauses in the Stability and Growth Pact and the reliance on Article 122 TFEU for SAFE highlight the EU’s increasing dependence on creative but legally precarious interpretations. Substantively, the rearmament effort may erode the European social model, as higher defence spending is likely to erode welfare and public investment. Ultimately, the project reflects continuity with past crises: lofty integrationist rhetoric coupled with measures that entrench fragmentation and fiscal imbalance.

The EU’s (not so) cheap talk on defence / Dani, Marco; Menéndez Menéndez, Agustín José. - In: EUROPEAN LAW OPEN. - ISSN 2752-6135. - 4:3(2025), pp. 425-440. [10.1017/elo.2025.10041]

The EU’s (not so) cheap talk on defence

Dani, Marco
Primo
;
2025-01-01

Abstract

This editorial critically examines the European Union’s rearmament agenda, framed by the Commission’s Readiness 2030 plan and the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) Regulation, in response to geopolitical threats and possible US disengagement. While EU leaders present military investment as essential for safeguarding the ‘European way of life’, the measures proposed reveal a deep disjunction between rhetoric and reality. The plan falls short of establishing genuine strategic autonomy, as NATO remains central and procurement from US industries is reinforced, undermining the claim of independence. Moreover, by relying primarily on national spending and only modest EU financial instruments, the initiative risks entrenching asymmetries between Member States, strengthening national military–industrial complexes rather than building a coordinated European defence framework. By the same token, the legal dimension is equally fraught: the selective use of (national) escape clauses in the Stability and Growth Pact and the reliance on Article 122 TFEU for SAFE highlight the EU’s increasing dependence on creative but legally precarious interpretations. Substantively, the rearmament effort may erode the European social model, as higher defence spending is likely to erode welfare and public investment. Ultimately, the project reflects continuity with past crises: lofty integrationist rhetoric coupled with measures that entrench fragmentation and fiscal imbalance.
2025
3
Dani, Marco; Menéndez Menéndez, Agustín José
The EU’s (not so) cheap talk on defence / Dani, Marco; Menéndez Menéndez, Agustín José. - In: EUROPEAN LAW OPEN. - ISSN 2752-6135. - 4:3(2025), pp. 425-440. [10.1017/elo.2025.10041]
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
the-eus-not-so-cheap-talk-on-defence.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (Publisher’s layout)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 290.85 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
290.85 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11572/468250
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
  • OpenAlex 0
social impact