Skip to main content

Ukraine Puts European Rearmament to the Test

From the series European news

On February 3rd, the new president of the European Council, António Costa, organised his first summit of the heads of State and government. It was an informal meeting dedicated to defence, with the aim of reaching a consensus on a synthesis that will be included in the new White Paper in April, and that will provide a basis for possible decisions at the official European Council in June. In the current context, however, it was also about “sending a signal to the president of the United States that the Europeans are prepared to increase military spending” [Handelsblatt, February 3rd].

British “reset”

One unusual feature of the summit was the presence of Keir Starmer. For the first time since Brexit, a British prime minister was present at a meeting of the European Council. According to Le Monde, this could signal “the start of concrete negotiations on the topic of defence, against the backdrop of Donald Trump’s return to the White House” [February 4th]. One open question is to what extent European funds can be used to purchase non-EU military equipment. For the French newspaper, British participation in EU military funding should not be ruled out, nor should the possibility that the way forward may be a military rapprochement between the UK and the EU through the creation of a European pillar in NATO.

Rumours reported by the Times [February 5th] also suggest that the issue of defence could be Britain’s opening for strengthening its European ties again. London and Brussels have reportedly formally initiated negotiations not only on military issues, but also on broader issues, including the revision of the Brexit trade agreement which has been in force since 2021. A UK-EU summit is further scheduled for May. Meanwhile, newspapers such as The Daily Telegraph, the Daily Mail, and The Sun have all criticised Starmer’s presence at the EU summit: the alarm raised by the Eurosceptic British press can be seen as indirect confirmation that the rapproche ment between Britain and the Union is not merely cosmetic.

The European agenda — already shaken by the Trump administration’s statements in the preceding weeks was further disrupted on February 12th, when the new American president, after a phone call with Vladimir Putin and without warning his allies, announced the immediate start of peace negotiations to end the war in Ukraine.

Unilateralism and American bullying

On the same day, Trump’s Defence Secretary Petr Hegseth declared that it was “unrealistne” for Ukraine to return to its pre-2014 borders or to join NATO, Europeans must now “take responsibility for the conventional security of the continent”, because any guarantees for Kyiv will have to be “backed by capable European and non-European troops”, but no American troops will be deployed to Ukraine. In addition to this, at the Munich Security Conference, Vice-President J.D. Vance made a vitriolic speech, accusing Europe of betraying freedom and democracy with its measures to obstruct far-right parties and its censorship rules on online platforms.

The European bourgeoisie has not been so brutally confronted with its military dependence on the United States since the bloody conflicts in the Balkans in the 1990s, which we defined as the “wars of European unification”. The political outcome of those massacres was to give impetus to proposals for an EU defence and rapid intervention force. But the US’ war of choice in Iraq in 2003 subsequently split the Union, freezing plans for a continental army for over two decades. It seems that the debate on military centralisation is now back to where it was before 2003. Caroline de Gruyter, columnist for the Dutch newspaper NRC [February 15th], sees the war in Ukraine as “Bosnia squared”.

Lotta Comunista, February 2025

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

Leapfrogging: The Chinese Auto Industry’s Leap Forward

Internationalism No. 73, March 2025 Page 15 From the series The world car battle It is predicted that next year in China the sales of electrified vehicles (mainly battery-powered or hybrid) will for the first time overtake those of cars with an internal combustion engine. This development will mark a historic about turn which will put the world's biggest auto market years ahead of its Western rivals [Financial Times, December 26th]. Meanwhile, the growth in sales of electric vehicles in Europe and the United States has slowed. BYD's leap forward Another important development in 2024 was the record sales of Chinese brands in China: they rose from 38% of the total in 2020 to 56%, a sign of the maturation of the national auto industry which is now able to challenge the Japanese, American, and European manufacturers. BYD's leap forward is impressive, comparable to that of Ford Motors after the First World War, when with the Model T, introduc...
Read more

Cryptocurrencies, Tariffs, Oil and Spending in Trump’s Executive Orders

Internationalism No. 73, March 2025 Page 8 Douglas Irwin, economist and historian of American trade policy, writes for the Peterson Institute that the tariffs announced by Donald Trump, if implemented, would constitute a “historic event in the annals of US trade policy” and “one of the largest increases in trade taxes in US history. One has to go back almost a century to find tariff increases comparable”. Irwin limits himself to providing us with a historical dimension to the planned duties. But the bewilderment and turmoil created, especially among Washington’s allies, derives from the fact that the tariffs being brandished are accompanied by a hail of presidential decrees and declarations that mark a profound political discontinuity, both in the balance of internal institutional powers and in the balance of power between nations. The watershed was expected, but the speed and vehemence of the White House’s assaults are setting the scene for a change of era i...
Read more

The Works of Marx and Engels and the Bolshevik Model

Internationalism Pages 12–13 In the autumn of 1895 Lenin commented on the death of Friedrich Engels: "After his friend Karl Marx (who died in 1883), Engels was the finest scholar and teacher of the modern proletariat in the whole civilised world. […] In their scientific works, Marx and Engels were the first to explain that socialism is not the invention of dreamers, but the final aim and necessary result of the development of the productive forces in modern society. All recorded history hitherto has been a history of class struggle, of the succession of the rule and victory of certain social classes over others. And this will continue until the foundations of class struggle and of class domination – private property and anarchic social production – disappear. The interests of the proletariat demand the destruction of these foundations, and therefore the conscious class struggle of the organised workers must be directed against them. And every class strugg...
Read more

The Party and the Unprecedented crisis in the World Order: A Crucial Decade

This first quarter-century has seen an epochal turning point in inter-power relations, triggered by China's very rapid imperialist development. Arrigo Cervetto recognised this process from the very early 1990s: Today history has sped up its pace to an unpredictable extent. [...] Analysis of the sixteenth century, as the century of accelerations and rift in world history, is a model for our Marxist vision ( La mezza guerra nel Golfo [The Half War in the Persian Gulf], January 1991). The course of imperialism was speeding up, and China's very rapid rise was opening up a new strategic phase with the new century. The United States, the leading power in the world, is being challenged by an antagonist with comparable economic strength which, moreover, openly states that it wants to provide itself with a "world class" military force within the next decade. Favoured by the 2008 global crisis and also by the pandemic crisis, China has forged ahead with its rapid rise for ...
Read more

European Imperialism and Imperialist Scission

Internationalism No. 50, April 2023 Pages 1-2 The postwar vicissitudes of European imperialism - from the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) in 1951 to the Treaty of Rome leading the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1957, and then to the Maastricht Treaty and the European Union in 1992, the euro federation in 1998 and the institutional Treaty of Lisbon in 2007 - provide an exemplary charting of the dialectic of unity and scission of unitary imperialism. The big concentrations of capital, and the powers in their grip, demonstrate the aspect of the unity of the global imperialistic system in its common interest to guarantee the production of surplus value and the conditions for exchange and circulation connected with it, together with the class rule on which it is premised. At the same time, the shares of the world’s social capital and the powers are permanently divided by the scission of the struggle to share out surplus value, markets and sources of ...
Read more