The EU realizes that it cannot rely on the US for protection. It now has a blueprint for a new joint military force

The document also talks about the need for an integrated approach to defense procurement, research and intelligence, making the bloc more competitive and efficient. It acknowledges that for this, national and EU spending will have to increase and focus on filling the gaps that currently exist across the EU.

Not all 27 EU countries are required to join; however, deploying troops on behalf of the EU would require the signature and participation of member states, and details of how that would work are yet to be confirmed.

While mocking Europe at the idea of ​​”EU Army” means that this latest proposal is a far cry from the 1999 goal of having up to 60,000 troops ready to deploy at any given time, it is still full of energy. Ambitious and unusual for a top-down multilateral EU. proposal, which is widely supported by all 27 member states.

These are early days, however, and reaching an agreement on anything costly from 27 countries facing very different security and fiscal concerns will be a long way off.

To get an idea of ​​where those at the top in this early phase, CNN spoke to more than 20 EU officials, diplomats and politicians from across the bloc with the aim of answering questions many people have asked. has posed for years: Will the EU ever have an army to call its own?

The big picture is that everyone agrees on a central point: Something must be done if Europe is to be kept safe.

Pietro Benassi, Italy’s ambassador to the EU, told CNN that while the Compass has to be agreed to by 27 countries – some are “constitutionally neutral, [and] others have diverse constitutional and military views” – he believes that the EU can “build a common strategic culture” and this plan will give impetus to that goal.

This opinion, or some version of it, was shared by almost everyone CNN spoke to. However, long-standing divisions are bound to slow that momentum.

Without a doubt the most astute country is France. President Emmanuel Macron has made no secret of his dream of a stronger Europe with greater integration on foreign affairs. He has even called for a “real European army” to reduce Europe’s need for US-led NATO protection.

The current target is the Compass Strategy agreed in March, while France holds the rotating EU presidency. But Macron may want to emphasize champagne on ice, as many of his European counterparts are less gung-ho when it comes to defense.

Most notably, several countries in the eastern EU – countries such as Poland, Estonia and Lithuania – support the plan, but only if a formal agreement specifically addresses the threat posed by Russia and the United States. to a lesser extent is caused by China.

For now, the document deals with the EU’s deteriorating relationship with its neighbour, but also says that “common interests and common culture have practically linked the EU and Russia”, and will still participate. The Eastern countries also expressed concern about any plan that could weaken NATO.

Scandinavians are similarly worried about Russia. Diplomats and officials from these countries explain that “we are at real risk from Russia in this part of the world” and make clear that “the transatlantic alliance needs to be strengthened as part of of any broader EU plan.”

Many officials, diplomats and politicians said they believed Macron was the key figure and therefore did not want to point the finger at Russia.

Next, the so-called “silver protein”. This is not exactly the same as the “Frugal Four” – Denmark, which opted out of the Compass Strategy, the Netherlands, Austria and Sweden – made it difficult for the EU when it signed off on the Covid package last year.

However, officials in some of these countries expressed concern that troops assigned to rapid deployment teams would never be used, that action would be vetoed and the whole incident would lead to a waste of money weakening NATO and curtailing the transatlantic alliance.

The final piece is Germany. The EU’s richest country is still negotiating its next coalition government, and officials say it is difficult to predict exactly what Berlin will look like next year.

A German diplomat told CNN: “We still don’t know who will run the defense. It seems likely that it will be the socialists who will be willing to make small contributions to things like hospitals. field and not participating abroad like France, I think, might want us. That could be a real disagreement.”

Despite all the potential pitfalls, there is a sincere optimism that these differences can be bridged if people are realistic and serious.

Rasa Juknevičienė, a member of the European Parliament and former Lithuanian Defense Minister, said that “only the EU can solve” the hybrid threats it faces from hostile parties in Russia and China. However, she expressed concern that if the bloc could not agree on issues ranging from cybersecurity, military capabilities, a “more realistic view of Russia” and above all spending, “it will like Greta Thunberg said, just blah blah bla bla.”

Former Finnish Prime Minister Alexander Stubb believes that Brussels’ renewed enthusiasm for security is “timely, important and real. America will not support European security forever.”

He said that if Europe is serious about defending itself “it must be understood that the line between war and peace is blurring … soft power has been weaponized and turned into hard power. We see it with asylum seekers being used as weapons. . . We see information, commerce, energy and vaccines being used as weapons.”

The EU has largely been applauded for the sincere scope of its ambitions and analysts hope it can strike a meaningful deal on one of the most complex issues in European diplomacy.

Velina Tchakarova, director of the Austrian Institute for European and Security Policy, admits that finding consensus will be a long process but positive movement could be seen.

“Once it is approved… there will be specific directions that the EU and its member states must take when it comes to building partnerships and alliances, building capacity, creating resilience in the region. key areas and areas, and ultimately achieving a quick and effective crisis. Management is based on a shared strategic assessment of common threats.”

That would be an extraordinary achievement. While not the EU Army that many people either long for or fear – depending on your perspective – it is interesting to see member states on the same page on an issue that clearly needs to be addressed one by one. so widely.

However, this is really the beginning of the process and there are many political issues to overcome – including next year’s French elections that could see Macron, the cheerleader, step down.

And politics is often what spoils Brussels’ best-laid plans. Steven Blockmans, research director at the Center for European Policy Studies, says that “for rubber to hit the road, member states will have to put aside concerns about blood and domestic treasures and let the common security interests prevail. Any member state could therefore delay or veto implementation because of so-called ‘significant’ national security concerns.”

For all the current positive sounds, it is entirely possible that once all 27 leaders are locked in a room to discuss the proposal, naked national interests and previous animosities will be lost. This continues and the plan is cooled down or shelved.

And while their top counterparts in Brussels remain optimistic that the plan is enough of a compromise to avoid such a hit, when so much money and political capital is at stake, diplomacy, compromise and union are at stake. Links can easily go out the window.

This is a first for the EU.