Aurélien Saintoul, LFI MP, member of the French Parlament’s National Defence and Armed Forces Commission: “The common defence project does not address the real problems”

The question of defence is first and foremost a question of sovereignty. Since sovereignty is linked to the people, we should ask whether there is a European popular sovereignty. Of course not, as there are several peoples within our continent. So there is already a problem of principle. Then, we must also consider the concrete questions that this “common European defence” would entail: who would command it? Which states could decide to engage it? And in service of whose interests could this common defence be used? Fascist leaders and their associates obviously do not have the same interests as democratic governments. We must not forget this constant: fascists do not respect the law. Why would they want to mobilise a European defence? To fight against immigration? What kind of relationships do these fascist forces envisage with authoritarian regimes like Russia or other countries led by the far right like the United States? Giorgia Meloni did not say a word after Volodymyr Zelensky’s humiliation by Donald Trump, and Italy has contracted with Starlink for 1.5 billion euros...

The announcements made by Emmanuel Macron, who dreams of this “common European defence”, are mainly for show. He seeks to demonstrate that he is still doing things; he wants to divert public opinion from his national mandate. It’s smoke and mirrors. He says he wants a “strategic awakening” in view of the political line taken by Donald Trump in the international arena. But like most of our partners, France is incapable of acting outside of American influence. We have agreed to train fighter pilots partly in the United States, we have American intelligence equipment, we have American catapults on the Charles de Gaulle, we are dependent on American oil, which is our main supplier. And France is not the only European country in this situation. This “common defence” project does not address the real problems, such as, for example, European production capacities, which are at their limit today. And that is why we cannot satisfy Ukrainian requests. We must therefore establish a programme for gaining independence, which will take months and years. On what timeline can we do this? And which European countries will truly want to develop independently from American oversight?

Ilaria Salis, Italian MEP, member of the GUE/European Left: “We need collective and democratic control of infrastructure and resources dedicated to defence”

Faced with the alliance formed between the American and Russian imperialist powers, what was already necessary before is now an urgency. For more than two years now, the eastern part of the European continent has been attacked by Russia and its allies; for several weeks, it is Greenland, a Danish province, that has been directly threatened by the United States. In this situation of rising dangers, we cannot yield to the logic of the “deal” that Trump and his libertarian affiliates are trying to impose on the international scene at the expense of the principle of self-determination of peoples, as European far-right parties would like.

But we must also not launch ourselves into a blind arms race which, in the current state of affairs, would only feed a military industry left to its own devices, and ultimately strengthen the imperialist logics already at work. It is therefore time for the left to imagine and to build from the ground up a new international order, consistent with our principles and values: internationalism, multilateralism, and peace with justice. But this also means working with strategic intelligence, being aware of necessary compromises and the processual nature of the path that can lead us to lasting peace.

To do this, we must first break the historical link of subordination to the United States and assert true autonomy. Washington does not treat Europe as a full ally, but as a vassal. Remaining in NATO – especially under Trump’s leadership – means giving up freedom of decision and action, accepting a subordinate role rather than acting as independent players on the world stage. For this, we must take as models member states such as Austria and Ireland, which have historically maintained strict neutrality and refused to allow any foreign base on their territory. In order to achieve our strategic autonomy against imperialist powers, but also to counter nationalist sovereignists in Europe and the continental conflicts they are always capable of provoking, an integration of defence at the community level is necessary. This option – like the existence of any army – is unfortunately a necessary evil, at least in the current phase. The form it must take is, however, inseparable from the level of political and institutional integration that Europe will manage to achieve.

A full-fledged European army would certainly be the solution most capable of preventing conflicts between member states or hazardous military initiatives outside the continent by some of them. But it seems difficult to conceive if the few member states that aspire not to the autonomy of the continent, but to fully integrate the US-Russia imperialist alliance, are able to block any decisive process from inside the European Council. In this, the question joins another concern: it is first necessary to ensure better collective and democratic control of infrastructure and resources dedicated to defence, to remove them from private interests and prevent the formation of a military-industrial complex. At the European level, this must now involve more transparency, particularly from the Commission, whose defence programmes are developed in a particularly opaque manner, leading to fears of strong influence from the arms lobby given the decisions taken so far. Ultimately, this means a revision of the treaties, which would strengthen the role of elected Members of Parliament and the responsibility of the Commission and Council before them.

Cyrielle Chatelain, MP, France, President of the Ecological and Social Group: “We must move forward with a coalition of countries sharing the same objectives and constituting the backbone and engine of a European defence”

Europe stands alone. Caught in a vice between the Russian threat and Donald Trump’s fanaticism. In his war against Ukraine, Vladimir Putin has found an ideal accomplice in Donald Trump. In barely a month at the helm of the United States, the latter has betrayed Ukraine and abandoned Europe. We are therefore at a decisive turning point: fragmentation or cooperation; rivalry or solidarity; withdrawal or transcendence. And let’s be clear, the ability of European states to separately guarantee their security is weak, in operational, economic, and strategic terms.

In this global chaos, Europe must assert itself as a political force, equipped with a shared and coherent foreign policy, thus speaking with a single voice to the world. A force capable of guaranteeing the security of its members through a logic of mutual guarantees and the construction of an entirely European defence industrial base, allowing independence from the United States. A force that will only be fully free and autonomous thanks to a rapid, ambitious, and shared exit from fossil fuels. Sourcing gas or fertilisers from Russia or American shale gas presents an existential risk, especially in case of global conflict. Our dependence weakens us.

Finally, hatred of progressivism, feminism, anti-racism, and humanism is the ideological cement of the Trump-Putin pact. A hatred they propagate: Russian interference in Romania, Musk’s support for the German far right, and the spread of fake news on social networks. They meddle in European governance through their Hungarian partner or in France with the help of the National Rally. We must therefore not be naive.

At the European level, we must not give in to Viktor Orbán’s blockade. We will need to move forward with a coalition of countries sharing the same objectives and constituting the backbone and engine of a European defence, capable of cooperating with non-aligned allied countries. In France, we should not let ourselves be trapped by the rhetoric of national unity, forcing us into increased austerity, social destruction, environmental setbacks, or the restriction of our freedoms and the rights of foreigners. This would mean abandoning the vital battle against the far right, which dreams of making France one of the cogs in the Putin-Trump axis.

Hélène Conway-Mouret, PS Senator, Vice-President of theFrench Parlament Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee, former Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs: “The European continent is the last bloc that, overall, still resists the rise of fascist movements”

The threat hanging over the European continent is both external, with Russia’s aggression against a number of countries, and internal with attempts to destabilise our democracies. European defence is essential today to give us sufficient means to defend our territories, while many European intelligence services report the possibility of a conflict with Russia within five years.

In Western democracies, the far right takes advantage of the principle of freedom of expression and plays on negative emotions of fear, anxiety, and hatred, in order to better hammer home their message of a need for order and discipline. They instrumentalise freedom of expression for the benefit of their propaganda. At the European level, it is important that regulations and directives establish controls and filters to combat this propaganda and fake news, as permitted by the Digital Service Act adopted in 2022 by the European Union, but also to strengthen the exchange of information to identify the sources of cyber attacks and prevent them. For this reason, Donald Trump’s dismantling of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency responsible for fighting propaganda and disinformation has a direct impact on the use of social networks by Europeans.

The examples of interference during the Moldovan elections, Romanian elections at the end of 2024, and German elections in early 2025 clearly demonstrate that the European Union must stand together to protect the integrity of its democratic processes. The European continent is the last bloc that, overall, still resists the rise of fascist movements. It is therefore fundamental to fight them, those who are in favour of this deregulation and these interferences while benefiting from the support of the Trump administration, as demonstrated by JD Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference. A coordinated, collective, and European response is the best protection against foreign interference, particularly in terms of cyber and influence on public opinion in the face of the removal of all barriers and filters by the tech giants. Protecting our infrastructure, from submarine cables to the moderation of social networks, will be achieved through new investments and the collective action of the European Union, to which it is important to attach Great Britain. Finally, the best protection against the rise to power of the far right is to return to the fundamentals of European construction: mobility of people who know each other, mix with each other, understand each other, and build a common future.

Vincent Boulet, Head of International Relations for the French Communist Party (PCF,) Vice-President of the European Left Party: “Rather than encouraging bellicose temptations that lead peoples towards catastrophe, a strong voice in favour of peace and law must be carried in Europe”

A “European defence” is dangerous, but European security is necessary and urgent. A European defence would presuppose a common army or, as Emmanuel Macron announced, a Europeanisation of the French nuclear umbrella. This is impossible given the centrifugal forces at work in the European Union, between Meloni and Orbán who pledge allegiance to Trump, or the Polish government subject to the American defence umbrella. A Europeanisation of the French nuclear force is no longer at all in the realm of deterrence; it amounts to taking the risk of nuclear confrontation.

What credibility do the speeches on the “independence” of a European defence have when they come from a power that has continuously aligned our country with the choices of the United States and has pursued the policy of its predecessors who liquidated our industries, starting with our defence industries? The war economy announced by Macron and his calls for the sacrifices of the French people outline an aggravated austerity, at a time when purchasing power is at a low ebb and our public services lack the essentials. It will only serve the financial markets. Trump must be pleased. His policy of transferring the burden of a war without end to Europe is working fully. Responding to the demands of the moment implies, on the contrary, conducting a policy of security and strategic autonomy, based on two pillars.

First, an initiative for a just peace in Ukraine. Three years after the unjustifiable aggression of Putin’s regime against Ukraine, there is no military solution. It is a political and diplomatic solution, with Ukraine, Russia, the European states, and under the auspices of the United Nations, that is on the agenda, based on the sovereignty and neutrality of Ukraine, on the principles of the United Nations Charter and the Helsinki Final Act. This must lead to a conference on collective security for the entire continent, with the exit and dissolution of NATO.

Secondly, our country needs to rebuild a public defence centre, serving the capacity needs of its national defence, completely independent of NATO and the United States. It must go hand in hand with a major policy of industrial renewal for France. Rather than encouraging bellicose temptations that lead peoples towards catastrophe, a strong voice in favour of peace and law must be carried in Europe.

Regards.fr

Click here to subscribe to ESSF newsletters in English and or French.