Amid rising concerns over Europe‘s ability to defend itself, the European Commission has introduced the role of a Defence Commissioner, appointing Andrius Kubilius, a former Lithuanian prime minister, to spearhead the initiative. This move comes as Europe faces the ongoing war in Ukraine, an assertive Russia, and uncertainty regarding the United States’ long-term commitment to European security.
Despite the creation of this new post, many analysts argue that the position may be more symbolic than substantive, with insufficient funding and unclear responsibilities. Kubilius’s role will largely focus on pushing for a more integrated and cooperative European arms industry, but achieving real impact without significant political and financial support seems daunting.
The Defence Commissioner’s Role
The task for Kubilius is monumental. Europe’s military preparedness has been exposed as lacking, with outdated equipment, small armies, and sluggish responses to increasing military needs. Although individual EU member states have their defence responsibilities, Europe is still overly reliant on the US for critical military equipment and support. Approximately 60% of Europe’s military hardware comes from the US, with an additional 15% from non-EU countries.
Kubilius’s job will not be to create a European army, as defence remains the legal domain of individual member states. Instead, his role will focus on consolidating Europe’s fragmented arms industry, encouraging nations to streamline production, standardise equipment, and increase their collective purchasing power. Such consolidation could potentially bring much-needed efficiency to Europe’s defence spending, especially in the face of Russia’s aggression and the prolonged conflict in Ukraine.
Challenges Ahead: Lack of Resources and Coordination
One of the major obstacles Kubilius will face is the chronic underfunding of Europe’s defence needs. Thierry Breton, the EU’s former commissioner for internal markets, estimated that €100 billion annually is required to bolster Europe’s defence capabilities. Yet, current EU commitments fall far short of this target. Between 2025 and 2027, the EU has budgeted just €1.5 billion for defence—a figure that defence experts argue is woefully inadequate for the task at hand.
As Christian Mölling, a defence expert, points out, the role may need more than just a commissioner. “To change the EU structure, you’re really looking more for a wizard than a commissioner,” Mölling said, stressing that Europe’s defence ambitions are unlikely to be realised without substantial new funding and clearer objectives.
There is also scepticism within the EU itself. Many member states believe that defence should remain under national control, and individual countries may be better suited to coordinate military capabilities than Brussels. The reluctance of member states like Germany and the Netherlands to agree on collective EU debt for military spending further complicates Kubilius’s efforts.
The Importance of Financial Backing
A major concern for Kubilius’s success will be whether he can secure enough financial support to make a meaningful impact. As highlighted by Camille Grand of the European Council on Foreign Relations, European countries will need to commit seed money to research and development if they want to create next-generation weapons and infrastructure, such as advanced missile defence systems and intelligence satellites. These essential technologies are still primarily developed by the United States, leaving Europe vulnerable.
One of Kubilius’s challenges will be convincing member states to prioritise collective military spending, which would enhance efficiency and reduce overlap in the defence industry. Currently, Europe produces 12 different types of battle tanks and 17 kinds of infantry fighting vehicles, resulting in excessive fragmentation and inefficiency. However, efforts to streamline production will require overcoming entrenched national interests and competition laws that prevent EU countries from fully integrating their defence industries.
A Shifting Landscape
With the war in Ukraine showing no signs of abating, Europe’s dependency on the United States for military support has become more evident than ever. At the same time, as Washington increasingly shifts its focus towards the rising influence of China, Europe’s military independence will come under greater scrutiny. The introduction of the new Defence Commissioner role signifies Europe’s awareness of this reality, but the question remains whether it is truly serious about stepping up its defence efforts.
The geopolitical landscape is changing, and Europe can no longer afford to rely solely on US support. The appointment of Kubilius reflects an understanding that Europe must begin to address its own defence needs more effectively. However, without adequate funding and a cohesive strategy that all 27 EU members can agree upon, the new Defence Commissioner may find himself fighting an uphill battle with limited tools at his disposal.
The Road Ahead
Ultimately, Kubilius’s success will depend on the political will of European leaders to invest in defence reform. As Ed Arnold of the Royal United Services Institute points out, “There’s a disconnect between the stated ambition you get initially and the hard reality of when you actually have to get member states’ approval.” Without robust support from member states, Europe’s new Defence Commissioner may struggle to bring about the meaningful changes necessary for Europe to take control of its own defence.
Kubilius’s appointment has raised hopes of increased coordination and investment in Europe’s arms industry. However, the reality of limited resources and resistance from member states could mean that the position remains more of a symbolic gesture than a significant step towards a more secure Europe.