\n<\/p>\n
Russia\u2019s full-scale invasion of Ukraine three years ago convinced Europe\u2019s leaders that they needed to spend more money on defense. On Monday, leaders from across the European Union and Britain will meet in Brussels to debate a vexing question: how to pay for it.<\/p>\n
It is a concern made more acute by President Trump\u2019s return to the White House<\/p>\n
The United States is the largest military funder of Ukraine\u2019s war effort, but Mr. Trump has suggested he will rapidly withdraw U.S. financial and military support and leave it to the Europeans. He has also insisted that NATO nations ramp up defense outlays to 5 percent of their annual economic output, a drastic increase from the 3 percent or 3.5 percent NATO plans to make its goal at its next summit meeting this summer. The United States itself spends only about 3.4 percent of gross domestic product on defense. <\/p>\n
And security is only one of the arenas in which the Trump administration is striking a more confrontational stance. Mr. Trump pledged on Sunday night to slap new tariffs on European trading partners \u201cpretty soon.\u201d That is intensifying a sense in Europe that it needs to be able to fend more for itself in a world where the United States is a less reliable partner.<\/p>\n
With the war in Ukraine, the European Union, which was founded on free trade and termed itself a \u201cpeace project,\u201d has become more committed to deterrence and defense. It is now scrambling to expand its defense industries and make spending more efficient and collaborative. Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain will attend Monday\u2019s gathering, the first time since Britain left the European Union that a British leader has met with the 27 leaders of the bloc in Brussels.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
Part of the debate will be whether the European Union will be able to raise more money to pay for defense through common debt, as it did to fight Covid.<\/p>\n
But the issue is thorny: Such joint fund-raising might impede the efforts of member countries to meet the individual demands that the NATO alliance is already making of them<\/a> in terms of raising military budgets. Of the 27 E.U. countries that will meet in the closed-door session on Monday, 23 are members of NATO.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n NATO\u2019s supreme allied commander in Europe, Gen. Christopher G. Cavoli, has already set capability targets for the first time since the Cold War. The American general has given NATO member countries specific requirements for equipment and force levels, as well as instructions on how to respond<\/a> in case of a Russian invasion.<\/p>\n There is consensus among officials and analysts that Europe lacks crucial elements<\/a> of defense like integrated air and missile defense, long-range precision artillery and missiles, satellites, and air-to-air refueling tankers that only the United States currently provides. Replacing those systems would take Europe at least five or perhaps 10 years, the analysts say.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n European nations also want to reduce duplication. Ukraine, for example, has been sent at least 17 different kinds of howitzers, not all of which use the same type of shell.<\/p>\n As Russia threatens from the East and Mr. Trump\u2019s support wavers from the West, Europe\u2019s leaders agree that they need a plan to both coordinate and expand their military resources. But diverging national interests and competing budget priorities mean that reshaping European defense will be difficult, expensive and lengthy.<\/p>\n And important countries on the eastern flank, like Poland and the Baltic nations, want to do whatever they can to keep the United States engaged in NATO and the defense of Europe.<\/p>\n The summit Monday is a first step. The E.U. leaders will discuss<\/a> military financing and joint procurement, and be joined by Mr. Starmer and by Mark Rutte, the NATO secretary general. The goal is to hash out priorities, which will inform the continent\u2019s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, and its new defense commissioner, Andrius Kubilius, as they work to draw up a more concrete plan, especially for weapons production.<\/p>\n The meeting also has symbolic importance, defense analysts said, as a demonstration that Europe is taking seriously a long-term threat from Russia and the need to reduce its military dependency on the United States.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n \u201cThis is critical for Europeans,\u201d said Alexandra de Hoop Scheffer, acting president of the German Marshall Fund, a think tank. \u201cThey don\u2019t have a choice, because war is taking place on their own continent.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Deterring Russia, which wants to split the United States from NATO and divide both the alliance and the European Union, is \u201ca generational struggle,\u201d she said. \u201cBut our political leaders have failed to explain to a younger generation why the alliance is important and why it\u2019s important for Ukraine to win this war,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n Europe\u2019s relationship with Washington is also on Monday\u2019s agenda, including how to cope with Mr. Trump\u2019s demands. Officials expect the discussion to address his insistence<\/a> that he wants to acquire Greenland. The island is an autonomous territory of Denmark, both an E.U. member state and a NATO ally. Danish and Greenlandic leaders say the territory is not for sale and will not be handed over to the United States.<\/p>\n The Greenland issue underscores just how drastically Washington\u2019s relationship to Europe may be changing, as Mr. Trump seems more willing to put economic and military pressure on U.S. allies than on its adversaries.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n But there is still a degree of shock in Europe.<\/p>\n \u201cNobody takes it seriously, or literally,\u201d said Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow at Bruegel, a think tank in Brussels, who studies European economies and trans-Atlantic relations. \u201cNobody wants to do so, because it would require rethinking the world as we know it.\u201d<\/p>\n While leaders like Mr. Rutte have emphasized that the continent cannot realistically go it alone without the United States, the goal is to be more self-sufficient.<\/p>\n E.U. nations have increased military outlays in recent years. They spent<\/a> an estimated $340 billion on defense in 2024, a 30 percent increase compared with 2021. At least 23 of NATO\u2019s 32 members now spend<\/a> 2 percent or more of their gross domestic product on defense, in line with NATO goals. Mr. Rutte has made it clear that 2 percent is a floor, not a ceiling, and that a new, higher standard will be set this year.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n With President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia busy with Ukraine and his military battered, European and NATO officials believe there is a window of perhaps three to seven years before Mr. Putin might be tempted to test the NATO alliance.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Finding a fix that boosts and coordinates European defense outlays will not be easy.<\/p>\n \u201cThe logic tells us that you need to have joint procurement,\u201d said Janis Emmanouilidis, director of studies at the European Policy Center. But there are barriers, including a lack of trust between nations and conflicting national self-interest. \u201cIt is protecting national industry, it is protecting the sovereign right to make decisions,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n When it comes to joint procurement, there is also the issue of how to finance it. Joint funding programs are clearly on the agenda, but exactly what that could look like varies.<\/p>\n It could mean a collective pot of money like Europe raised during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic. Funding could also come from a vehicle supported by the European Investment Bank, which is the lending arm of the European Union, or from a group of nations outside the structures of the bloc.<\/p>\n In a joint letter<\/a> last week, 19 European countries said the bank \u201cshould continue exploring further ways to take an even stronger role in providing investment funding and leveraging private funding for the security and defense sector.\u201d<\/p>\n The letter suggested a serious discussion of \u201cspecific and earmarked debt issuance\u201d for defense projects. For now, key member states like Germany and the Netherlands reject the idea of collective borrowing for defense, and the EIB is prohibited<\/a> from making loans for strictly military uses.<\/p>\n Any serious European defense would have to include Britain, a nuclear power and member of the United Nations Security Council, the main reason Mr. Starmer has been invited to attend. He has himself emphasized security cooperation with the European Union as a way to bring post-Brexit Britain closer to the bloc.<\/p>\n Mark Landler contributed reporting from London.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n