What is the Future of EU Defense (ft. UEF)

The European Union has a mix of 30 kinds of tanks, 20 types of planes, and 27 different military offices. The U.S., on the other hand, has just one military headquarters and fewer kinds of tanks and planes. If European countries shared their military resources and worked together more, they might be stronger within NATO and less reliant on the U.S. So, the big question is: Should the EU team up for its own defense and foreign policies, maybe even start a European army? Or should it just stick to working within NATO?
✅ Video contributor and sponsor
Union of European Federalists - UEF (UEF activities are co-funded by European Union)
www.federalist...
The UEF is a supranational, non-governmental political organization who are committed to the struggle for a European Federation endowed with supranational institutions with limited but real sovereign powers.
☝ Vincenzo Camporini, Italian General & Former Chief of Defense
Support the Channel:
💁‍♂️ Patreon: / eumadesimple
☕ Buy me a Coffee: www.buymeacoff...
📷 KZbin: / theeumadesimple
Sources:
federalists.eu...
federalists.eu...
www.europarl.e...
www.europarl.e...
verfassungsblo...
commission.eur...
www.swp-berlin...
www.politico.e...
wayback.archiv...
www.academia.e...
www.euractiv.c...
www.europarl.e...
en.wikipedia.o...
www.euractiv.c...
en.wikipedia.o...)\
data.worldbank...

[@Kaslor1000]

"Why are the Germans only terrible at war when they are on our side" - that's honestly hilarious.

[@thembastoep733]

Yall made sure they were defanged, now they have no teeth

[@thorH.]

@@thembastoep733true

[@connorcrowley1]

Germany (both sides) were beasts of a military untill the 90's. Now their military is generally not considered functional or even able to mount a domestic defense.

[@badluck5647]

​@@thembastoep733 You can't blame German degrading their military through bureaucracy on anyone except Germany

[@NIdo-tj7vu]

Nope, we are to blame. The bureaucracy is like a depression that numbness the entire country. We can't build a toilet without 100 different permits

[@absolutezeronow7928]

As an American and someone who believes in the vision of the EU, I definitely agree that the EU should become more independent of the US especially given how toxic our domestic politics are. Hopefully EU stands strong against Russian aggression even if my country again makes the mistake of going isolationist.

[@herptek]

Europeans tend to be almost as woke as America. So it is almost as bad here as there, although the ideology has anglophone origins. European military doesn't increase our military security, it only stands to decrease the security of those countries that have always handled their own business in this matter.

[@wyldhowl2821]

(Speaking as a Canadian) you are correct about that. Toxic politics tends to bleed over borders as fast as COVID, and with an even worse effect. One has to wonder: if Europe had done so previously and rejected George W. Bush's push for NATO expansion, whether Russia would even be an aggressor today. Putin might never have gotten the kind of "justification" for the things he did, as escalating the aggressive posture of Russia required a lot of buy-in from Russia's military and intelligence services (who needed to be convinced Russia was facing a mortal threat if they did not act aggressively).

[@chickenfishhybrid44]

​@@herptekuhh there's alot of influence in this ideology from French intellectuals.

[@chickenfishhybrid44]

Yes, because it's the job of the US to help subsidize the "vision of the EU"? Right? Self loathing Americans desperate for approval from Euroepans guna self-loath.

[@herptek]

@@chickenfishhybrid44 In the particular form that is currently fashionable it is mostly an anglophone phenomenon. Bizarre rebellion movements like BLM are typically American liberal currents that white liberals everywhere like to ape to show allegiance to ideology.

[@Blabla-od7vt]

I agree with your opinion. The US is unreliable, but so is the EU with its principle of unanimity and the apparant lack of common geostrategic goals or the capability of putting them into action.

[@markangellotti893]

Requiring unanimity is a huge weakness. Even in NATO this is a problem because Sweden is prevented from joining. Qualified majority voting, not unanimity.

[@csibesz07]

"US is unreliable" They have been quite reliable so far.

[@kkrolik2106]

US is more reliable than Germany

[@heressomestuffifound]

Exactly this.@@markangellotti893

[@tnickknight]

Germans are the biggest problem

[@albevanhanoy]

Absolutely stunning video! I strongly agree with all your arguments. A true common defense policy, deeper cooperation and integration of our armed forces and enhancement of our military industry are vital to preserve the sovereignty of Europe. The USA have proven they are no longer a trustworthy ally, and Russia has proven they are actually hostile. Thank you for your amazing work. This video deserves millions of views.

[@gonfer457]

I don't understand how there are people who think Russian is ever trustworthy.

[@didixtar2863]

How is the US an untrustworthy ally? Because their asking Europe to pull its weight? Or because their giving us billions of dollars for the Rusia-Ukraine wars? I think the reason why the US is not to keen on a united EU army is because they know the french would be calling the shots and the French are quite anti-Americans, look at Macron’s Napoleonic fantasies 😂

[@calc1657]

What have the US done to prove they are no longer a trustworthy ally?

[@daseinzigwahrem]

Unfortunately this will not happen due to Fr*nce

[@albevanhanoy]

@@daseinzigwahrem France is literally one of the most important driving forces of the union's military integration. You clearly don't know shit.

[@ImperatorSomnium]

United European Armed Forces!!!!

[@giovannimezzadri266]

yes

[@smal750]

never id rather die

[@ImperatorSomnium]

@@smal750 we have a deal

[@Mr_Topek]

NATO is better

[@jaro551]

You're not a European... shush​@@smal750

[@apb2081]

My choice is EU european army part of NATO. THE EU army will make NATO even stronger the two things work very well together , the EU army will be the second best army in the world after the US.

[@attilaabonyi8879]

This i agree

[@Ganymede559]

Good idea.

[@filipe5722]

Likely not after the US, but after China. Anyway, we should strive to be the first, not second after anyone.

[@apb2081]

@@filipe5722 china has a very weak army

[@marshalljulie3676]

Nah EU needs to be able to stand without the US in case of war breaking out over disagreements. EU is powerless right now US blew up Germany's pipeline and the Germans can't do anything about it but ignore it. That's not how a sovereign country acts.

[@GnosticAtheist]

As a Norwegian, Im all good with NATO, but considering the issues with that funny orange man, if he wins again, we might have to consider the Union if they made an army. But without an army the EU is pretty irrelevant here, as we would just be a natural resource piggybank without getting security in return.

[@Blabla-od7vt]

For nobody in Europe is the EU irrelevant, not for the British, not for Norway, not for Russia. Norway is deeply integrated with the EU through EFTA and the EEA. I believe Norway's economy is more diverse than just being a 'natural resource piggy bank.' Joining the EU would likely bring both opportunities and challenges to Norway's natural resources sector and overall economic landscape. This naturally depends on the negotiations upon entering. Rest assured that no country will join the EU if it doesn't benefit from the membership.

[@Ganymede559]

@@Blabla-od7vt The EU is irrelevant for Britain because we have the CPTPP.

[@saturationstation1446]

orange man works for the brittish crown. no need to worry about that. any person who supports established power is almost guaranteed to be a european loyalist. also guaranteed to have never done a single day of real work in their lives.

[@GnosticAtheist]

​@@Blabla-od7vt You may have misinterpreted due to me not being clear enough; the EU as something to consider joining as irrelevant because the driving factor for Norway is the required military support of an organization. The economic part is not enough to get the people to vote yes in EU membership, but joining NATO was not a major issue, as that meant military security. We do not have the population for an effective army, thus making that the top priority for most people, and joining the EU requires a popular vote. I am fairly informed about the EU, but most Norwegians are not, or rather, dislike the entire concept of unionization, regardless of what it actually means.

[@MyPrideFlag]

@@GnosticAtheist Orange man won't dissolve NATO

[@dexocon2658]

With Austria and Hungary, an european army could be a major risk. They would give Russia all informations on a plate..

[@Nowherenear-w1d]

or simply block any decision making

[@filipe5722]

In other words, you are saying that NATO membership is a major risk because Hungary (and Turkey) are already part of the alliance.

[@marshalljulie3676]

What the hell are you talking about? What information exactly? Russia literally helped Germany remain a powerhouse US is taking that power from Germany just look how quickly they abandoned France in Africa to save themselves no Europe is stuck footing the bills for Ukraine. Natural gas from Russia was much cheaper than what they are getting from US the pipeline sabotage was the only way to force Germany to buy natural gas from US which is much more expensive crippling factories and other businesses.

[@illuminati2341]

@@filipe5722Yes but Turkey isn’t pro Russia they are just pro Turkey which is the right way

[@JohnnySpan]

Austria?

[@AtakenSmith]

US: "Spend more on defense! NO NO! don't make an army...!" xD

[@cgt3704]

Yes. We need to be more independent from Washington and be taken seriously. And one way to do that is to have our own army that can deter any agression from countries like Russia. And it will boost our sense of unity and cooperation

[@MyPrideFlag]

I want my country to be independent from Berlin.

[@trthib]

@@MyPrideFlag That's easy, you just have to stop taking german's money, and investments, and stop exporting there, and..... Oh wait you'd be Belarus 2.0....let me guess, you are Polish....

[@MyPrideFlag]

@@trthib Not taking money is pretty easy, even tho they never paid for destroying Poland to the ground. It would be nice if their paid for reconstruction of Saxon palace but it's insignificant in the grand scheme of things. They can stick both reparations and covid renewal money up their as*, as long as they don't treat as a colony, not much better than China treats African nations who receive their money. Stopping export would me more difficult, Polish economy is a subcontractor of German one and Germans controll many sectors of Polish economy and sell us their finished products. In time it will be done, tho (transition from subcontractor to highly developed economy). But if Germans force us into a federation and controll our laws we will be forever a poor German province. They already use EU institutions, trying to stop us from building nuclear power plants or cargo port in Świnoujście. And German controlled media attack the construction of CPK which would be a competition to Berlin or Frankfurt airport.

[@AlexiAtlante]

⁠you have 3 options 1-Be independent, again for 4th time be occupied by Germany or Russia of course the UK is your friend for fuck Germany like is a friend of Portugal to fuck Spain while they oppressed Irish for centuries 2- be controlled by Russia 3- be controlled by Germany 4- be in the EU with many other nations What do you want ? Look for the future , if you wanna repeat the history do it , but you need to be more wise and think, ok happend this , finish we unified with you you strong and all we can improve that’s it , or compete or cooperate.

[@yourdailybeats1127]

Why not create a full union of nato best of all worlds

[@sciamachy9838]

Woooo, Camporini out of the blue? gg, content is really going up with quality

[@hegemonYT]

We need stronger borders, I hope Frontex gets more funding and I hope we can remove the 1.5M illegal immigrants currently within the EU

[@zawiszaczarny7876]

Funding ain't the problem, eu is more involved in human trafficking into the eu than protecting the border. Cash was actually spend on teaching migrants on how to get to the eu, wake up sheep.

[@thomasbootham2707]

A man can only dream the eu is all for this illegal mass migration multiculturalism garbage that the people of europe never got a say on

[@ChristiaanHW]

the problem with Forntex is, that because of all the things once signed at the UN the EU has to do this and that. we need a real border guard system that protects the borders and sends away unwanted people trying to penetrate the border. right now they have to pick up the immigrants and drop them in a European harbor because according to the UN we have to help them all. the EU just has to find their balls and pull out of those outdated treaties, at the moment those treaties will end up destroying Europe.

[@MB-em9ek]

@@ChristiaanHWThe same UN that wrote report to encourage a Replacement Migration for Europe...

[@marshalljulie3676]

​@@ChristiaanHWwell the logical thing to do is stop exploiting poor countries stop creating wars end foreign bases in other countries. Stop meddling and funding oppositions in other countries and you will have less migrants.

[@p.serrano3546]

As a Portuguese and European, this week I was happy that the EU took decisions to regulate platforms and social networks on the internet for all EU countries. More than power, this shows unity, fraternity, concern, teamwork and a sense of state. This is the Europe I want. A Europe capable of protecting itself and creating mechanisms to have a joint military force that allows, above all, to show unity, strength and equally guarantee the safety of all of us.

[@petrudanmandru9583]

Great video, as an Romanian I can say that EU need's an army, we have a conflict at our back door and instability in the Balkans. NATO it's a great alliance, but EU need to wake up and take action.

[@Franco60.]

The European Union MUST HAVE ITS OWN ARMY. We must learn to manage our sovereignty, not only in terms of food and energy, but also in military and geostrategic terms. ♥️🇪🇺♥️

[@savethebeesplantherbs8809]

well you get a war with the us and uk then

[@PeachDragon_]

Most importantly to stop american imperialism in Europe

[@Franco60.]

And Imperialism Russian !!!

[@person8203]

be careful what you wish for. Can you imagine each nation giving up their own military power and allowing the EU to be in control of a huge EU army. Might as well rename it to United States of Europe. Who knows what they would decide to do with an army, probably talk for 10 years and then nothing. Terrible idea. NATO without the US is still a strong well established group of allies that have spent decades training together. And on the plus side the US is still a big part of NATO

[@Jugement]

"European soverenty" will never be a thing for a simple reason. We arent part of a single country, and our nations all have very different foreign relations and national interests. We cannot build a credible common force in that regard, since every member with that prerogative would just end up veto-ing left and right. The only way to build a credible common force would either be to all federate under a unique country, or military command with absolute executive power. And both are obviously a complete deal breaker for every member

[@catastoic]

As a Polish I doubt France and Germany will ever be able to understand that we are larger than they wish we'd be both economically and historically, we are ambitious nation that will not allow it's politics be decided in foreign states ever again (it never worked for us in the past 200 years). Uniting Europe''s foreing and internal policies is simply impossible as long as Germany and France will play more significant role than other states.

[@1justme]

If it were to ever work, every country has to accept the others as equals. 🇬🇧🇵🇱

[@pp38pp]

Whereas: 1. The European Union happily did without Poland until 1999. 2. Poland receives much more money from the EU than it pays out. 3. Poland deludes itself into thinking it is much more than it is, in fact the (few) steps forward it has made were paid for with German and French money. 4. Poland has been creating problems for the EU since its entry. It follows that, if Poland doesn't like the idea of a more united Europe, it can go out of its way as the English have already done.

[@jascrandom9855]

I think a Joint Budget and Procurement policy would be a good step if a united EU army isn't possible yet. That is all participating EU members join their military budget at an equal proportion of GDP and collectively fund the development and purchasing of equipment and weapon systems. The "Army of Europeans" I think should be made up of volunteer soldiers who want to join it of their own volition who want to defend Europe as a whole.

[@NickDeurloo2007]

First I wanted to say that I love the concept of a more united Europe, also wanted to say that I'm Portuguese🇵🇹 and Dutch🇳🇱. Well I agree with you said. But there are some countries that don't have the presence or not a total presence of a EU military equipment, in Portugal and the Dutch case it's their Air Force, they both have the F-16 and some other planes that don't make part of 'Made in Europe' , besides that if we act independently from the USA, we could get blocked of using those planes. That is my concern, even though I like the F-16. To conclude I think EU is getting united over time and that is a good sign. Merry Christmas and happy new year for you all.

[@Michaelcj-m2d]

Europe should only be buying from with in Europe. Euro fighter etc..

[@HotSkorpion]

While I agree that EU should move for more integration, and not just regarding Defence, the US would not be happy with it, and Portugal would definitely take the brunt of it because of Lages. Strong negotiations would have to be done to take Lages from the US, otherwise, the whole thing becomes useless as it would be a massive backdoor for the US to do whatever they wanted in EU. And I dont think they would ever want to do that. Additionally, our pact with the UK would also have to be considered as this one is much much older that the EU and US themselves, but still very much valid. If the UK would call on it, we'd be screwed...

[@Icenfyre]

Portugal has 97 F16s

[@NUNOANDROIDMOB]

28 :) @@Icenfyre

[@stephanledford9792]

I am American, and while I like to think the US is a reliable partner (and has been in the past), today we are potentially one election cycle away from changes in foreign policy that may or may not be favorable to Europe. It makes sense for European nations to pick up the slack and handle their own defense, so if the US is available to help in a crisis, great, but if the administration wants to not involve the US in what is perceived to be a European military issue, that is not a problem for Europe. I would say the same thing for all nations currently relying on the US to protect them.

[@drscopeify]

It's not about Europe building a large army but about the issue of making sure Western Europe will be committed to defending Eastern Europe. It's one thing to build an army but a totally different thing to actually be able to declare war on Russia. NATO forces on Western Europe to defend Eastern Europe an the USA makes sure that is the case. Without the USA the risk is that Western Europe will sacrifice Eastern Europe to appease Russia.

[@Michaelcj-m2d]

Drag other countries in a illegal war in Iraq. War is a racket --read the book ☮️

[@pierman4858]

​@@drscopeifyI understand the fear. But isn't the purpose exactly to defend EU teritory. Meaning in practice a multinational defence force under an EU command. This is not the same as say France deciding to cut a deal with Putin and give Poland away. If the force was under EU command and obliged by law to defend the EU . Furthermore as a Dutch EU citizen I would rather be part of an EU army than a purely Dutch one. Simply because in practically any scenario we the Dutch would be heavily dependent on foreign support anyway.

[@Nowherenear-w1d]

Changes in foreign policy that may turn defence upside down means you are not a reliable partner. Because nobody guarantees the war can't emerge during that election term

[@jean-philippebobin3732]

​@@pierman4858The fck you say that France sell Poland to Puting, we didn't by Russian in huge quantitys before Ukraine War.

[@wyattdean5192]

Hey man! As an American I really think you hit all the points here. I 100% Agree that the the EU needs to shift towards becoming more militarily independent. I confidently believe that a Stronger EU would in a stronger in America and thus a more free world that benefits all of our interests. There are so many reasons why EU should become more independent in a military context

[@foolwise4703]

I could not agree more that Europe needs to unify its outer policy. Relying on nato means being fully dependent on the US, which is not a healthy friendship where the US get to dictate policy and demand more finances, leading to frustration on both sides.

[@MariusKist-tl4wh]

Concerning the purchase of the F35 Germany thought that it needed a plane which can carry american tactical nuclear bombs, to enable Germanies "Nukleare Teilhabe". Eurofighters are not licenced to carry these. First they intended the F18 Super Hornet, but then switched to the more modern F35. So Germany thought quite sensibly.

[@icu17siberia]

I think this is a good idea-though there are many complex challenges. Having said that, taking US for granted for defense is not good policy, and protecting European trade routes on the oceans is critical for European independence.

[@beasley1232]

True but as an American I can say that the American people themselves our upset with Europe that they aren’t taking their own defense more seriously since it pulls US attention away from domestic issues and always has since ww2. Currently 71% of Americans believe our allies are weak while our enemies are strong. (Russia, Iran, China etc) The USA 🇺🇸 will not always be there forever and will be increasingly more occupied with its own internal problems as well as China in the following decades. Although undermining US military defense may just lead the USA to seek other military alliances like it is already doing with AUKUS or with Papa New Guinea

[@Pouncer9000]

When G W Bush gleefully tried to (and partially succeed) divide the EU it made me forever detest US foreign policy; it's one thing to promote your own interests, it's another thing to take a hammer and destroy what isn't useful to you. The EU should absolutely build up a convincing and autonomous military capability, France is an example here in that it integrates NATO but retains full sovereignty over its military, be it on industrial or strategic level. How many EU countries operate the F-35 now, the plane that supposedly buys you a premium US protection plan, but you're not allowed to lift the lid and see how it works?

[@johnkelly7757]

Very, very complicated situation but a useful, informative video explaining. It.

[@SeArCh4DrEaMz]

In the long term we need to dev a common EU defense policy (army) I really hate to admit it,I dont like the idea of having a powerful arms lobby in the EU but we cannot depend on the armericans, their agenda and interest isnt ours (war in iraq+afghanistan and the migrant crisis as a result..) a lot of the weapons systems that we buy here in europe from the americans only serve the interests of their own arms industry while at the same time we depend on them for our security and thus are subjected to what I would describe as an undesirable influence on EU policy...

[@bobjohnson3940]

As a simple American who pays attention to geopolitics and history probably more than the average person I personally trust Europe and Japan for that matter to manage their own zone militarily. It would have to entail a slowish transfer. It would lighten the burden on the US and increase Euro autonomy and personally I believe the world needs a Europe and a Japan with a little more teeth and a little more strength. Like I feel the years of a war torn Europe feel over. I say that with a reluctant hope that this is the case and maybe even a USE or United States of Europe is on the horizon because I would love, love to have that partner across the Atlantic. Could you imagine these political and military tacticians from history into the present working together as one cohesive item? As a brother with the US? Yes. I agree the US should always be a partner but I do think Europe should work toward being one full item that works together without one single nation vying to dominate which will be hard to resist, sort of like the states here. Cheers.

[@beasley1232]

Japans problem is very complicated. Due to ww2 Japan isn’t actually allowed to have a military, ESPECIALLY a navy, a law that was put in place by China 🇨🇳, the USA 🇺🇸, the Soviet Union and the UN after ww2. Therefore Japan has a national guard force that acts as their military instead, while Japans navy cannot take action without the green light from the USA.

[@PMFL1983]

🤝

[@progressisbeautiful1541]

Lets be more united in this year.

[@user48762]

As a French I think the EU can defend itself. We should not be dependent on America or any foreign power. I don't even think NATO is necessary. There should be the EU instead of NATO.

[@herptek]

Then we would be just dependent on it, which would represent none of our interests. As long as the Americans are against Russia or in security competition against it, we have common security interests with America. Because it is so gigantic a military power factor we are less dependent on each other, which is a good thing if you ask me. European nations would do well to have nuclear weapons like France however just in case America quits the team due to some political fluctuation.

[@NoName-hg6cc]

We can have both: Europeans defense and NATO

[@ocanica3184]

This video touches on but doesn't really address the real elephant in the room, a common foreign policy. To have this means a fundamental shift in how the EU currently operates which includes removing the veto which many EU members have a vested interest not to remove. Even then is a EU military a defensive one or can it project extraterritorially? French interests may not be the same as Polish. The video is great but it's an example of putting the horse before the cart.

[@jb920]

Something similar to an American setup may work. Have an EU level military and let each member state have their state level military. In the US there’s the federal level military and each state has a National Guard that is under the State’s Governor when not deployed abroad.

[@lenydrake1716]

10:10 Germany was forced by the U.S to buy F-35 to keep their nuclear shield. This raises the question, should europe also develop a joint nuclear deterrence capability or remain overdependent on the U.S? The US would be against it of course, and for obvious reasons. It would also be very difficult to develop consensus amongst EU countries to develop consesus on the subject but it seems obvious to me that European countries shouldn't rely on the U.S for such an important key factor in modern warfare.

[@edgardebruin5539]

EU army! ❤️❤️❤️

[@tobiwan001]

10:00 Germany only bought a small amount of F-35s and only for nuclear sharing. There currently was not other aircraft available certified to carry the B61 bomb and not hopelessly outdated. Which jut shows that Europe also needs joint nuclear weapons.

[@jeffsaffron5647]

Given the huge economic wealth EU has, having its own military is something we should have done decades ago. There are more and more extreme conservative voices coming from the US showing us we simply can't rely on US support anymore.

[@clashofthemonsterstyles5752]

Fantastic channel. I highly appreciate what you are doing. What would EU Made SIMPLE think how we can get more spin on the idea of an integrated EU army into the national and european public debates?

[@nicholaswalsh4462]

As an American, I mostly see positives for the US when it comes to a United States of Europe or European Federation or whatever you folks end up calling yourselves. A European Army, fully united and integrated, will enable Europe to be a more capable and integral partner in NATO while simultaneously allowing the US to reorient and refocus its own spending towards the Pacific, which is an area far more immediately important to the US. Similarly, a European Federation gives the US a like-minded partner on the global stage that has the political, economic, and military clout to act as a counterweight to the growing might of China. Of course, it would also reduce US influence over Europe but plenty of Americans dont think we should be influencing Europe, anyways, so that's arguably another plus

[@NoName-hg6cc]

Well, USA are our greatest ally so an United Europe, while less influenced by you, would help you being stronger and viceversa

[@nicholaswalsh4462]

@@NoName-hg6cc that's the idea.

[@easternpromises7991]

I don't get the bit about Germany and F-35s. Half of Europe already has or at least had them ordered. Does Europe have even a semblance of a comparable 5th gen fighter jet at least in development? No? Alright then...

[@cristianovidiupavel8293]

We definitely need that!

[@Keiranful]

I believe an Army of Europeans can only be an intermediate step. We need a strong union in matters of foreign policy and defence, while leaving the rest as decentralised as possible. One European army, with one command structure, answering to one political body on the European level, that is part of NATO. That is the only way it can truly work. No half measures

[@LarsvanZon]

Too much 'should' and 'could'. France wants/needs to be able to project power all over the world (as there are parts of France all over the world). Poland needs a strong land based force. We need to start with taking steps, not trying to design a solution that will fit everybody. For example, combine (voluntarily) the armies of (small) countries in an joined army, with the task of defending the participating countries and acting as a single member in NATO. That would only be defensive (member states and/or NATO) or for UN peace keeping. Let that grow by being open for other European countries to participate. But no partial membership, all in (with all military power under shared command) or not. When that works, start thinking about the next step. Like integration in the European Union.

[@blackhole3298]

Correct, I think an EU Army would be a good thing. You have France that is pushing outwards, the East wants strong deterrence and Germany/Netherlands wants to a fair balance. All depends essentially on the EU Army treaty that will simultaneously be an EU military doctrine

[@az099873]

If EU makes army with in NATO, that means that Ireland and Austria automatically become NATO members

[@Retroscoop]

"30 types of MBTs" sounds slightly frivolous a) some countries like Belgium, Luxemburg, Lithuania and Ireland don't have MBT's b) France has only Leclercs and wants to upgrade them to EVOs, Italy has only Arietes, Latvia has 3 T 55's for training purpose c) several European countries have different types of Leopard 2 (Germany, Greece, Finland, Hungary...) including for training purposes. Integrating armies still equipped with the Leopard 1 and those that have the Leopard 2 isn't a big difficulty. Greece has both or have local or Chinese variations on Soviet tanks. d) Poland has 3 types of Leopard 2's and 2 types of T 72's including the PT 91. But they also added Abrams and a Soutk Korean MBT of which they want to buy and produce locally 1000 !!! Romania has 5 types of MBTs e) Several countries still have some old 2nd generation or even 1st generation tanks officially listed (Portugal for example). They are physically still there and listed, but.... well... Turkey has or is upgrading 750.... Pattons. Glad to see no NATO member is upgrading Shermans ! f) Should Ukraine join NATO/EC... they are using 12 types of MBT's right now I doubt it many EC countries will be willing to sacrifices their local production, like the Italians or the Poles.

[@kazomazo6646]

I always say the EU should create a grouped EU military program so R&D manufacturing and mentaining and save a lot of money for all EU members! So even small EU countries would have a significant stronger armed forces much beyond what their 2% could ever dream of accomplish alone!

[@Hainstille]

While a european army sounds like it would get rid of a lot of redundancies, it would also be hard to pull off as many member states would probably fear a loss of sovereignity. So an army of europeans might just be right for the time being, as it would be detached from that and under EU control. This in turn could also help in situations and crysis seen in the past where single member states had to shoulder a lot of evacuations and rescue missions.

[@madden12]

Then it should be called Europeam Defence Force. All cointries would contribute with funds and soldiers. But all equipment should be interoperable. Pretty much what he said at 14:40, I wrote this b4 I reached that part of the video

[@Retroscoop]

Things are not going to change a lot when it comes to MBT's anyway: 1) The US is planning an Abrams X 2) The UK is planning a Challenger 3 3) The French want an Evo-version of their Leclerc 4) Several countries don't want MBT's anymore but are switching to different types of alternatives: Boxer, Griffon... 5) The Poles will build their planned 1000 South Korean tanks (?) 6) Italy ? Germany ?...

[@stevewinkleburg5300]

Blud does not understand the nato command structure

[@manubremer8295]

To explain why germany buyed F35: they needed an replacement for the tornado, in order the continue to be able to use the nuclear bombs, wich the US gave them. The only european solution would have been FCAS, wich isn't ready yet.

[@noone-em3wc]

the EU is terrible. giving them an army is the worst possible idea. standardizing separately is fine but giving unelected officials an army is crazy.

[@NoName-hg6cc]

No it's not. A Federation will need its own army

[@kazomazo6646]

I see ALL EU members in a very positive and proud light! All EU countries should stand together! We are stronger together! We share the same content and almost the same values we are stronger, smarter and faster to deal with hardships when we are together united! One for all and all for one! I am a big fan for united EU armed forces.

[@connorcrowley1]

If the F-35 is the best multirole airplane available for the mission requirements (it is) then you buy the F35. Yes we should not rely on the USA for our military equipment, we should be interoperable with the USA, and long term be competitive with the USA in production. But nothing in the EU can come close the the value an F35 provides in this decade. The mission capabilities were clearly needed this decade.

[@jascrandom9855]

A united EU military could have created a plane just as capable as the F-35. Though that being said, the F-35 was supposedly a collaborative effort and theoretically, they could've had F-35 factories within the EU.

[@connorcrowley1]

@@jascrandom9855 yes and that is great for when it is available, but the F35 was purchased in response to a Russian invasion. Buying eurofighters or Rafales would have been idiotic considering the current short term risks outweigh the mid or long term benefits of domestic production.

[@Qnexus7]

@@connorcrowley1 doing things mostly in response to emergencies is a failure of its own.

[@MDP1702]

Agreed. Currently no European fighter can match the F35 and they are often even more or equally expensive. Thus buying the F35 is logical. However the EU needs to ensure that they have a competitive 6th gen fighter ready in the future to not rely on the US at that moment.

[@No_Way67]

Europe is not just the EU!

[@OXIDOME]

If only EU listened France from the begining 🙄 we (the french) always talked about strategical autonomy and defense the EU should seek independence rather than the easy cheap and comfy protection of the US because we have seen that the US thinking is america first which is completely normal for a country but in EU we kind of forgot that there is no friendship between countries but only mutual interest and the US don't hesitate when it's in their interest. Just look at the news the US is unreliable on a long period as we see in ukraine they spy on the eu government and during covid they bought face mask on an airport that was supposed to go in france... In france we say "with friends like that we we don't need ennemies"

[@DerDoMeN]

Not often that I fully agree with anyone but this time seems to be an exception :) Great short analysis and really sensible conclusion. I really hope that EU will head in this direction.

[@elidas1008]

When we are comparing military spending with China and Russia we cannot compare dollar to dollar. We should also make a comparison taking Purchase Power Parity into consideration. With one milion dollars you can buy more stuff that goes boom in Russia than in the US.

[@lomborg4876]

We need an EU army with EU-developed weapons. Will boost our security and economy

[@met71metaldetector55]

It would be better to have an EU army integrating collaboration between European industries and not competing with each other, we Europeans are very good at this if we try.

[@jakublederer1257]

I have no idea how feasible this is, but I think leaving the ground forces national, but making a EU Air Force and maybe a navy might be a good compromise. European air forces especially are kinda weak compared to the US given how ungodly expensive planes are. I think this might allow us to pool resources on the expensive parts, whilst leaving actual territorial Defence in national hands so that member countries don’t feel too declawed. Hell countries could maintain all military branches they want even if they can afford it, but with EU air back up to make sure we don’t lag behind.

[@jochentram9301]

Regarding the F-35, they're easily made capable of delivering US-made freefall nuclear weapons. Yes, you could integrate that into an EU-made airplane (Tornado is nuke-capable for US PALs), but that's harder and more expensive. Assuming the US is willing to share the latest-gen PALs, that is. Oh, you didn't know Germany has a nuclear strike capability? Go look up the "nuclear sharing" agreements the US has with various countries, like Germany and IIRC, Türkiye.

[@chickenfishhybrid44]

Yep. Germany was looking into having the Eurofighter certified to use the same nuclear bombs. That takes alot of time and money to do no matter what plane it is. Theres also the added wrinkle that obviously all sorts of things about the Eurofighter would have to be shared with the US to complete such a task. Something that the various countries that build and operate Eurofighter may not want. The F-35 was already certified and the Tornados Germany had for the same use were aging out.

[@Rui301]

Personally I quite like the idea of an EU with proper military strength that's not overly dependent on the USA as we are now. Even taking their reliability as a granted, which is dangerous, it makes us too susceptible to American political interference. Also on a side note I quite dislike the idea of an European federation, I don't think it would go smoothly (or that its even possible) nor do I like the idea of losing my country's independence.

[@fedethefico]

you wouldn't lose your country's independence, it would become a state similar to Texas in the US. Without a federation on the other hand, you would have no say, and be swallowed by China or USA and then really lose your independence (de facto).

[@ChristiaanHW]

i agree, there's way to much diversity in Europe to become a federation. we need to keep the national governments to ensure that each nations people get the representation they need. if Europe becomes a federation the smaller nation will likely lose their voice and their people will have no one listening to them. we need to work together a lot more, but we have to stop just shy of becoming a federation.

[@kkrolik2106]

Not gona happens due differences in Politics , simply France and Germany will be happy to sold Baltic state to Russia for Cheap Gas and Oil.

[@BolphesarusMaximusWardius]

Exactly my view. I am glad I found someone who agrees that the EU needs to be strong and independent in itself, while also not federalising

[@Qnexus7]

there are many available formulas for making things work. but main point stands, we're stronger in unity particularly when there are elephants like us, russia-china in the room.

[@stevelobs6601]

You dont see one point, the us-militäry doesnt want a strong partner, they want a weak partner which buy a lot weapons from the us, thats all.

[@heressomestuffifound]

:55 It’s not surprising. The U.S. inherited the role of the British Empire after WW2 and prefers to keep it that way. The U.S. wants a Europe that is dependent on it and that can’t challenge its power now or in the future. It’s a strategic manipulation.

[@mycatspethooman5590]

The only downside I can see is that the eu takes too long to react to a situation

[@kvici]

among the issues listed there is one that should be solved relatively quickly: common materiel procurement. set and update standards for all relevant items on EU level, ask member states for orders, and procure them centrally, together. this will ensure interoperability to a much higher degree than it currently is, and use economy of scale. gods, in this, we need to learn from corporate procurement standards.

[@MernoMoral-t3j]

Make it like share of percentage in total defence badget the country with higher the percentage ,they have primary defence contract

[@FarsightAE]

EU needs a unified military. Bring back the legions, restituat orbis.

[@inbb510]

Good luck trying to persuade Ireland. Furthermore, good luck trying get countries who are already taxed to death pay more for the military. (Especially young people who tend be more "anti war" and anti-helping Ukraine because that's helping the capitalist military industrial complex...)

[@FarsightAE]

@@inbb510 A unified EU military would cost less than divided national militaries.

[@inbb510]

@@FarsightAE , yes I agree. But the Irish... Not so much you'll find out.

[@FarsightAE]

@@inbb510 Yeah I know.. people like clare daly... 🤮

[@inbb510]

@@FarsightAE , well there you go. And as I said, young people are the ones who support people like her. American military dominance is here to stay.

[@kazomazo6646]

The EU must have an EU unit armed forces, to be the main sword and shield of the EU. Together we are stronger, we as European can take care of ourselves.

[@JaegerDreadful]

I would love the idea of a comination of 1,2 and 4. Having the EU command it's own forces, separate from the national militairies, would be fantastic. And on top of that having stuff like drones and such for own and NATO member use, while also starting the forges of the European MIC just gets me so stoked.

[@herptek]

Separate EU forces would not strenthen European defence or even the MIC necessarily at all. Increasing national level military budgets might hope to achieve this. It is our strength that we are not dependent on centralized organizational arrangements for our defence. Only in some extremely specialized fields would there even be much advantage of having a unified pool of assets, such as in otherwise hard to acquire nuclear weapons stockpiles, which many small countries can't cost effectively acquire on top of their other expenses necessary for defence.

[@JaegerDreadful]

@@herptek I think we shouldn't do anything with nuclear weapons.

[@herptek]

@@JaegerDreadful Then our nuclear deterrence remains the job of Americans if you trust them with the responsibility.

[@uweinhamburg]

'NATO or the EU?' Why does it need to be exclusive? Why not both?

[@thomasmerlin4990]

because not all European nations are part of NATO, however "both" is actually the current situation.

[@christopherchristianvanlan1809]

EU is not challenging the US. We need the Americans and we are happy they want to help us.

[@filipe5722]

They don't want to help us, they profit from us. When we cease to be useful, they will drop us. Without an alternative, we are doomed, and frankly, I would prefer if the alternative were European, rather than Russian or Chinese.

[@marttiniiranen7394]

Absolutely EU army. All 26 (Hungary not included) armies under one command immediately. US may think what they like.

[@EntertaningAmerica]

You think we’d allow the colonies to do that?

[@golddigger8759]

"30 different MTBs" (I wouldn't count in each variant of example Leopard 2A4, 2A6, 2A7 nor different types of Leclercs)

[@mkooij]

I loathe the idea of a European army. Each country should focus on their own army. Thats it. We can cooperate, we honour the NATO pact but fucking hell no I want to be part of an imperial army

[@Parthemonium]

EMBT does not stand for European MBT, its Enhanced MBT. The whole project is also named MGCS, the EMBT was just a demonstrator. Germany is not alone in buying the F35 in EU, no wonder if we dont work together to build a 5th Gen Fighter.

[@pilapila3580]

If the Americans are no longer interested in NATO and ready to give up their European hegemonic position, the European countries will go their own way or form alliances: Germany will follow Austria, Switzerland and Ireland into neutrality and spend comparatively little on armaments, although it will develop non-nuclear strategic long-range weapons and buy them in relatively large numbers in order to own at least have a retaliatory weapon in case a foreign power feels like bombing German cities. France, with its widely dispersed territories, will go its own way, even if this is difficult given the rising development costs for military hardware, and perhaps continue to try to play a balancing role vis-à-vis Russia, which unfortunately makes it impossible for France to play a leading military role in Europe. Britain, together with at least the Nordic countries, the Baltic countries and Poland, will build a kind of NATO 2. Britain will then need bases in the Baltic states and in Poland. The latter will please the Germans, who will then be defended by Poland and the militarily very capable United Kingdom, albeit involuntarily and completely free of charge. Which will always get Polish ultra-nationalists up in arms. ;) If the European Union octopus absolutely needs a military toy, it can set up a foreign legion, although it would be highly unpopular if the soldiers were naturalised afterwards. How about EU robots? Or a small EU drone hire service for the token support of a losing belligerent party? Some of the countries not mentioned above may want to offer bases to a foreign power, for a little extra income or protection. Japan still needs the United States and should develop nuclear weapons as soon as possible, just in case, before China becomes overpowering.

[@BolphesarusMaximusWardius]

I am definitely not a federalist, but I support this idea-if just to decouple from the US.

[@didixtar2863]

Decouple from our main security provider, technology provider, energy provider and second most important trade partner. Sounds like a brilliant plan 😂

[@BolphesarusMaximusWardius]

@@didixtar2863 so you would rather be at their whim whatever the situation. I am not advocating the complete isolation from the USA in a day. But we need to slowly become more independent, And about you mentioning energy, most our energy comes either domestically, from the rest of the EU or from Russia Though the latter is currently on pause for reasons..... The security provider is exactly the point, that's why Europe needs to become stronger. In the future relations could sour, or the us could collapse or something else, so if Europe is alone, we'll be defenceless. Yet again, I think you are misunderstanding my argument. It's not to end relations at once but to slowly become more autonomous.

[@Mr_Topek]

​@@BolphesarusMaximusWardius They are the strongest country in the world. Also we're in NATO. This is just stupid. EU is an economic alliance and should stay like this.

[@BolphesarusMaximusWardius]

@@Mr_Topek they are indeed. But they could always choose to abandon us, not very likely anytime soon, but it's always good to be prepared. Trump was a good wake up call with his threats to leave NATO. If the USA were to do that we'll be in trouble. Also, the EU is a neo-functionalist organisation-its scopes widen as it sees fit. Originally it was just a trade agreement for basic industry ( European coal and steel community). Now it partially controls the economies of entire states, it's environmental policy, parts of it's foreign policy etc. I am not saying it shouldn't expand in this way, or that the EU should have its own army, but having a more unified command structure would be highly beneficial, and a logical step for protecting its interests and to integration for the federalists.

[@didixtar2863]

@@BolphesarusMaximusWardius you used the term decouple. It’s a pretty specific word. If you want more independence that’s fine. But decoupling from the US means to cut all ties, and that would be a deadly mistake. We’d get eaten alive by Rusia/China/India/The Middle East. I agree that Europe should take its own security more seriously, but Europe can be strong, independent even, but still be allies with the US, Canada, UK, Australia, Japan, South Korea, because make no mistake all of those countries are going to choose the US if sides are to be chosen. Strong enough to deal with its own affairs, but smart enough to be on the right side (clearly the US’s), that’s the winning strategy for Europe. PS: as for energy, I’m aware that America wasn’t our second most important energy provider a couple of years ago, but since the invasion of Ukraine and the decoupling from Rusian energy they’ve become our second most important energy supplier. That’s why I brought it up, because now we need them more than ever: in security because we have no hard power, energy because we have very little resources and they’re the world’s largest producer of oil and gas, in tech because we have no big tech and trade because they’re our second most important trade partner and more importantly, because our main trade partner is China, Rusia’s main ally, that’s right our main trade partner is our main enemy’s BFF. It’s pretty clear to me that Europe should try to be stronger and capable to act independently in pursue of its own interests, but not decouple from the Americans and their camp, because there are no other friends to be had out there, not for us anyway.

[@VaucluseVanguard]

The makers of this clearly do not understand NATO command structures and the role of individual nations command structures within. Once a capability is force assigned to NATO. it is under NATO command and can be used for those missions and tasks that have been agreed in the 'assignment' order. Some of the proposals that have been put forward within the EU are a complete duplication of the specific Missions and Tasks undertaken by NATO command structures.

[@d.dimitrov3207]

Imagine if all 50 US states have their own army and each of these armies decides on its own what policy to have and what type of weapons to purchase. Do you think Illinois for example will be willing to spend money on aircraft carriers since they don't even have access to a sea or ocean? If Mexico is their main enemy and Canada is a friendly country do you think the northern states will care about spending so much for their defense since the main enemy is far south? EU countries are wasting their money without having a common EU army and a common foreign policy.

[@erwinhun]

I think Russia's war on Ukraine really underlines the necessity of having our own, efficient, coordinated defence capabilities. While we have our own snakes (Orbán), the US has a problem with isolationist forces withing themselves and cannot fully be relied upon. Also, about the only thing I agree with Trump about is that it is not fair that the US carries so much of the responisbility for military defence in Europe and across the world. We should share the responsibility.

[@iam5085]

Agree, and the war in Ukraine has shown that we need more than 60t soldiers.

[@Michaelcj-m2d]

Europes interests are not USA interests.

[@PierreGillet-i1x]

The nuclear umbrellas provided by the U.S as well as possibly by France, are not dealt with.

[@salahidin]

I agree with you, but what happens with France's Nuclear Deterrent? Who would control it? What would be the doctrine? Would France be ready to share its weapons and nuclear secrets with other EU members? As much as I would like this to happen I have my doubts.

[@nenasiek]

Having diff equipment is good, it means theres diff strenghts and weaknesses.

[@starchunkss]

The EU can barely decide on how to support Ukraine let alone develop a united defense pact without the US.

[@diesel4ever273]

As an European, I want the EU to work almost like one big country, we should invest a lot more on defense. Our economy is larger than the US, so there's no reason for us to be behind the US. Instead of investing on environmental campaigns only, we should invest on military campaigns as well. We have the potential to make the US look up on us, not down.

[@HiR3x]

I love this video , But to be honest 60k is very low number of active soldiers. If you want to make a difference i belive it should be 150k to 250k , With this force you can deterr russia and any other force from the beginning.

[@maybeyesmaybeno6285]

The idea of EU army was obstructed by the UK for so long. Luckily, that’s not the case anymore.

[@Jonas-sw8mj]

Europe and Turkey should cooperate closer, our interest align better with Turkey than the US.

[@jonpetter8921]

"Why are Germany terrible at war when on our side" that s quite kinda odd and funny........:D

[@markuslueken220]

What about the UK and Norway. Even so, they are not EU they should share the same interest. I agree with 95% - but I do not like ten content sponsor combination. Strong agreement. We need a European integrated millitary - lets start by using English as the sole language in the military. Disagreement: We are not really as bad because Russia will only threaten the rest of Europe after the UA is defeated. So we have to be able to build up the forces - we do not need 100% ready forces by now. Here the Fensh are akting better than the rest of the EU. Disagreement: We need to define the REALISTIC mission first. The German armee spends money for over snow vehicles. Are these vehicles to help Switzerland or to protect against the Swiss?😂

[@vicamu541]

europe should have a central militairy budget and only a few types of planes ,tanks ,etc for continental protection while the others can still be used for national security

[@MrMastermind85]

I very strong advocate for the United States of Europe. That should form the EU as new superstate and superpower, which must include a Navy which must be very much stronger than what the US has, because of it's necessity to cover way more Sea areas than the US has to. The US has only to cover it's bi oceanity. The EU has to cover as continental peninsula multiple seas and due to the fact that there are over sea teritority of the EU brought in by former colonial empires like France, Netherlands, Portugal and Spain which still hold such teiritority, has to cover that as well. Ile de la Reunion, French Polynesia, French Guayane and Netherlands Antilles or Ceuta from Spain, to name some. What the EU does not need so much is Army, because the EU has just one Border due to it's peninsula character. My guess is that a 500.000 men strong Army of military drafts and 150.000 to 200.000 professional expedition force should suffice. What EU needs as strong as the Navy is Airforce. Airforce and Navy should be equally strong. To complete it the EU needs a convincing nuclear component that deters it's eastern neighbour Russia. Due to the lack of land in that regard i would place the entire nuclear weapon arsenal of the EU on Submarines and Carriers. Then the EU can say to the US that they can focus on China and we deal with that fuckbut named Putin our self and also with Israels trouble. I guess by then US should be glad that we can do so.

[@paulgee1952]

Sorting out the logistics , is the EU's biggest challenge to self security , that Poland has had to get new equipment from outside the EU to meet the rising demands , shows how poorly this currently is through out the Eurozone and between each country. NATO standards mean nothing if the E.U refuses to deal with them , falling to outside U.S pressure in arms trades. Reducing the 178 arms varieties down will be a huge start .

[@ΚωνσταντίνοςΑποστόλου-η7σ]

Different people of EU have different enemies IT WILL NEVER WORK!

[@Dendarang]

I don't think EU needs a complete break from the NATO or that that would be particularly desierable for EU or even for NATO. I think the ideal would be for EU armed forces to be NATO-within-NATO, a single, unified command of all EU countries's armies integrated together that is within NATO framework with the US, Canada, UK.

[@MatthiasBach-p7d]

I would love to see the EU becoming a Federal State, of course with its own army 🇪🇺

[@rubiconprime1429]

If nothing else, Europe should standardize its equipment, even if it has to be on American designs. While it would chain Europe to the US, it would at least make interoperability between the countries of Europe possible. That said, for the sake of independence, a standardized European military industrial complex and procurement system should be formed. However, before any of this will be possible, the EU will need to reform its dedication process away from unanimity to majority rescission making to ensure single members, or small groups cannot hold back the greater whole of Europe. Hopefully with the aid of the new Polish government this can become a reality.

[@illusivec]

Honestly, I don't see a "european army" ever being a reality at least not until all the member states esentially give up their sovereignty and just meld into a single federal state. Considering even the EU countries who are relatively closer to each other, like Belgium and Netherlands can't seem to agree on much regarding policy, it'd take nothing short of WW3 for France-Germany and Spain to agree to become a single country. Even if miraculously all the EU countries agreed to it, I have a feeling the US would never allow it as a unified EU Army, given time, funding and proper leadership can eventually surpass the US in military might.

[@fijau]

The EU countries have very different strategic interests. The war in Ukraine exposed strong economies like Germany and France as immature to lead the whole union. I'm from Poland. Their unwillingness to supporting the Eastern flank was very discouraging to me. Instead, Germany hoped Ukraine would fall in a matter of days and Germany would be able to sell the rest of the EU Russian natural gas, earning a commission. As for the joined weapon programs, Poland was refused access to some of them by Germany. Germans only want to sell us weapons and have full control over how Poland uses them, for example by restricting access to the technology and licenses. Poland has been working for years on its air defence system supplied by the USA. Germany only started the program half a year after the invasion of Ukraine, and obviously it's going to sell other, smaller European countries its own systems, earning in the process. But their program itself is in very early stages. Same goes for some other programs, like the European main battle tank. That attempt at controlling Poland is exactly why we are buying weapons from the USA and South Korea now. We don't feel we can depend on Germany. Germans only care about their own economy. The same goes for the latest EU's attempt at centralization. As its result, four biggest EU countries (Germany, France, Spain and Italy) would have full control over not only what weapons Poland buys, but also over its Eastern border. It could open another trail of illegal migration into the EU, which Putin is trying to abuse right now. So, a strong nay to a joined EU army from Poland.

[@yourdailybeats1127]

A better solution, in my opinion, is to have a united nato federal army and a full nato Federation, allowing a European and american Federation where we have the strength to focus on both sides of the earth with ease

[@MDP1702]

This is even more difficult than EU army. In that sense an EU army would be a step to something like that (though I don't see this happening).

[@dantepr1566]

Hah! Funny joke.