Europe inactive needs a safety council

Donald Trump’s reelection as US president is likely to reignite tensions with European leaders over transatlantic security. Nevertheless, even if the United States remains actively engaged in NATO during and after Trump’s second word as president, Europe faces an uncomfortable reality: the era of unconditional US safety guarantees is over. Meanwhile, the continent confronts a resurgent threat from Russia as its invasion of Ukraine continues unabated.

However, this context of uncertainty could service as the impetus for European states to establish a European safety Council (ESC) to better coordinate their defence and abroad policies. First proposed by French and German leaders in 2019, the ESC would function as a high-level and streamlined decision-making structure to preserve peace and safety in Europe. Crucially, it would operate as a steering committee for European states to take the lead in maintaining regional safety while remaining aligned with NATO and EU structures.

The ESC will tackle the most pressing deficits in existing European safety structures. Firstly, the ESC would guarantee European states can proactively find defence policies among themselves. Even without Trump’s reelection, the United States was already expanding its attention on the Indo-Pacific region, and would hence be little likely to proceed its leading function in Europe’s defense. specified coordination could even bolster NATO’s “European pillar” if ESC members hold each another liable for gathering their 2 per cent of GDP defence spending commitments. This added layer of common accountability will reenforce Europe’s collective defensive capabilities while simultaneously addressing Trump’s longstanding criticisms of Europe’s “freeloading” off of the United States’ existing military presence in the region.

Secondly, the ESC could facilitate the strengthening of the UK’s defence cooperation with the EU after Brexit. Despite departing from EU defence mechanisms in 2020, Britain remains a key stakeholder in European security. In fact, French president Emannuel Macron first proposed the ESC to keep Britain’s engagement in Europe’s defenses, but the thought gained small attention in London at the time. Now though, the Starmer ministry is pursuing a defense pact with the EU while remaining outside of the bloc, and the organization of European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen has likewise argued that the ESC should include Britain.

Finally, during times of emergency, the ESC would act as a convening place for European leaders to rapidly make responses to specified crises. NATO and the EU have sometimes struggled with decision-making due to their size and the request for consensus, whereas the ESC could respond rapidly to rapidly emerging threats like cyberattacks and hybrid warfare. By avoiding the same request for unanimity that especially marks EU decision-making, the ESC could pre-empt obstruction from pro-Kremlin leaders like Hungary’s Viktor Orbán or Slovakia’s Robert Fico.

With that in mind, the ESC must be selective and geographically diverse with its membership, as well as stay at a comparatively tiny size of 12-14 rotating seats. A smaller council ensures swift decision-making while rotating seats bring fresh perspectives and prevent dominance by larger powers, striking a balance between efficiency and inclusivity. Prospective members must besides be non-neutral European states that have advanced military readiness, geostrategic importance, and adequate democratic consolidation. possibly most importantly, the ESC must be capable of adaptability and self-renewal, so it should review its membership, structure, and procedures all decade to accommodate any shifts in Europe’s geopolitical dynamics.

Under those terms, the ESC should have 5 core members serving staggered five-year terms. This would guarantee continuity and strategical leadership without the structural ossification that can arise with permanent membership in collective safety bodies like the UN safety Council. Furthermore, these core members should be a geographically diverse group of European states which are already major contributors to European safety with large standing armed forces. Consequently, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and the UK would be the most logical candidates to become the 5 founding core ESC members.

In addition to these core members, the ESC should have 7 to 9 supporting members serving in two-year staggered rotating terms. Like the core members group, the supporting members group must be regionally varied to guarantee the broader representation of all European states, including smaller EU members like Luxembourg and non-EU NATO allies like Norway. Observer position could likewise be extended to global bodies applicable to European safety like NATO and the European Union, allies outside of NATO and the EU like Ukraine, and neutral European countries like Ireland and Switzerland.

That said, any critics have argued that the ESC would simply replicate or even weaken the mechanisms that already be in NATO and EU structures. To be clear, the ESC must be designed to complement those structures by addressing the existing deficits within and between them. NATO would thus stay the cornerstone of transatlantic defense, while the ESC would act as a steering committee for Europe to be more self-sufficient with its defenses. This will enable European states to respond to regional crises more quickly, decisively, and effectively.

Although Trump’s second word will most likely be a much more crucial challenge to the transatlantic alliance than his first, it might actually supply an chance for Europe to take a leading function in its own security. Establishing the ESC would so signal Europe’s readiness to preserve peace and safety in its own region without undermining existing alliance structures like those in NATO and the EU.

Francis Shin is an author and investigation analyst focused on global governance, democratic resilience, and grand strategy. His expertise spans anti-corruption regulations, clean energy policy, and alliance structures. He has held roles at various prominent think tanks around the world, including the Atlantic Council, the Royal United Services Institute, and the Center for a fresh American Security.

Please support New east Europe's crowdfunding campaign. Donate by clicking on the button below.