German and UK defense chiefs warn of Russia threat, press for faster rearmament | DW News

European Rearmament: A Call to Action in Response to Russia

Key Concepts:

• Peace Dividend: The reduction in defense spending following the end of the Cold War, reinvested into public services.
• Step Change: A significant and fundamental shift in approach, specifically regarding defense and security spending.
• Grey Zone Activities: Actions taken by a state (like Russia) that fall below the threshold of traditional warfare, including cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, and sabotage.
• Moral Dimension of Rearmament: The framing of increased defense spending not as aggression, but as a necessary action to protect values and deter conflict.
• Whole-of-Society Approach: The idea that national defense is not solely the responsibility of the military, but requires engagement and awareness from all citizens.

I. The Joint Call for Rearmament

The UK’s Chief of the Defence Staff, Air Chief Marshall Richard Knighton, and Germany’s Chief of Defence, General Kasen Boya, have jointly authored an article arguing for a substantial increase in European defense spending. Published in The Guardian and Germany’s Develper, they cite a “decisively westward” shift in Russia’s military stance as the primary justification. They state a “duty to explain to the public” the necessity of this increase, representing the largest since the Cold War. The chiefs acknowledge the previous “peace dividend” – the reinvestment of funds from defense into public services following the Cold War – as “understandable at the time,” but now insufficient given current threats. They explicitly state that rearmament is not “war-mongering” but a “responsible action” to protect citizens and preserve peace, asserting that “strength deters aggression, weakness invites it.”

II. Political Support and Spending Targets

This call for increased defense spending is echoed by British Prime Minister Kier Starmer, who indicated a willingness to accelerate the UK’s commitment to spend 3% of its economic output on defense. However, Starmer emphasized that increased spending is not the sole solution, highlighting the importance of “coordination and collaboration” with European allies to strengthen NATO – specifically, a “European NATO.” He stressed the need for a collective approach, focusing on how countries work together, not just how much they spend.

III. Historical Context and the Urgency of the Situation

Professor Sir Lawrence Freedman of King’s College London, a specialist in war studies, contextualized the current push for rearmament. He noted that the British Ministry of Defence had previously struggled to justify the necessary funding increases. The urgency stems from two key factors: diminishing reliance on the United States as a security guarantor and the need to support Ukraine. Freedman pointed to events like the “Greenland issue” (likely referring to US handling of a potential Chinese base in Greenland) as contributing to a perception of reduced US reliability. He also highlighted the historical precedent set by previous US administrations – including Trump – who have consistently urged European allies to contribute more to their own defense.

IV. The 3% vs. 5% Debate and the Role of the US

While a 5% defense spending target (previously advocated by Donald Trump) remains distant, Freedman believes the current momentum will likely push spending closer to the 3% mark, a significant increase from the “barely 2%” previously allocated. He emphasized that increasing European defense capabilities is crucial not only to hedge against potential US disengagement but also to strengthen the case for continued US involvement in European security. The logic is that demonstrating a commitment to self-defense makes Europe a more valuable ally to the United States.

V. Re-evaluating the “Peace Dividend”

The framing of the post-Cold War “peace dividend” as an “understandable choice” was questioned. Freedman acknowledged it would have been difficult to maintain high defense spending after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. However, he suggested the real turning point came between 2010-2014, particularly with Russia’s annexation of Crimea. This event signaled a more serious and challenging phase in international relations, a realization that came too late.

VI. Germany’s Evolving Role

Germany is increasingly taking a leadership role in European defense, possessing the financial resources, industrial capacity, and political will to significantly increase its contribution. Under Chancellor Scholz’s successor, Germany is demonstrating “more boldness” in explaining the rationale for increased defense spending and working closely with the UK and France to provide “strong direction” to European security and support Ukraine.

VII. Russian Aggression and the “Tepid Response”

Freedman argued that reduced European defense spending did not directly encourage Russian aggression, but a “tepid response” to earlier actions – such as the Syrian civil war and the annexation of Crimea – emboldened Russia. He suggested Russia misinterpreted this lack of strong reaction as an indication that any future, larger-scale invasion of Ukraine would also meet with limited resistance. The unexpectedly strong Ukrainian resistance and the subsequent Allied support fundamentally altered this calculation.

VIII. The Moral Dimension and Public Engagement

The framing of rearmament as a “moral responsibility” is intended to broaden the debate beyond purely geopolitical considerations, emphasizing the defense of Western values. However, Freedman acknowledged that increased defense spending will inevitably lead to debates about national priorities and domestic expenditure. The “whole-of-society approach” advocated by the defense chiefs aims to raise public awareness of the ongoing “grey zone activities” employed by Russia – including cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, and sabotage – which pose a constant, everyday challenge to European societies. He cautioned against “panicking” the public, but stressed the need to move beyond complacency.

IX. The Nature of the Current Threat

The current threat is not solely about the prospect of a large-scale conventional war. Russia is actively engaged in “grey zone activities” designed to divide European societies, undermine support for Ukraine, and generally destabilize the region. This requires a sustained and comprehensive response, involving not just military preparedness but also increased public awareness and resilience.

Conclusion:

The joint call for European rearmament represents a significant shift in thinking, driven by a perceived increase in the threat from Russia and a growing uncertainty about the long-term reliability of US security guarantees. The argument is framed not just as a matter of strategic necessity, but as a moral imperative to defend Western values and deter aggression. Successfully implementing this “step change” will require not only increased defense spending but also greater European cooperation, a more proactive approach to countering Russian “grey zone activities,” and a concerted effort to engage and inform the public.