Writing in *Foreign Policy*, Hoover National Security Visiting Fellow [Jakub Grygiel](https://www.hoover.org/profiles/jakub-grygiel) argues the European Union’s lofty foreign policy aims are not backed “by any real ability to promote them—or, when needed, defend them.” Defense spending among member states atrophied in the 2010s, and the slow increase in spending today won’t do much immediate good, he writes. The US, long grumbling about this imbalance, appears unwilling to stick around and shield the EU much longer. The EU must rapidly re-arm if it wishes to keep the transatlantic alliance intact, Grygiel says.
Nordstream getting destroyed was the event that made the US privy to the high level of disarray in Europe. That pipeline was a nice thing, it was infrastructure that could’ve propelled Europe farther into the future, instead it’s destroyed, the countries it links together, at odds
Trajectory is definitely the word here, where exactly is Europe heading?
2 comments
Writing in *Foreign Policy*, Hoover National Security Visiting Fellow [Jakub Grygiel](https://www.hoover.org/profiles/jakub-grygiel) argues the European Union’s lofty foreign policy aims are not backed “by any real ability to promote them—or, when needed, defend them.” Defense spending among member states atrophied in the 2010s, and the slow increase in spending today won’t do much immediate good, he writes. The US, long grumbling about this imbalance, appears unwilling to stick around and shield the EU much longer. The EU must rapidly re-arm if it wishes to keep the transatlantic alliance intact, Grygiel says.
Nordstream getting destroyed was the event that made the US privy to the high level of disarray in Europe. That pipeline was a nice thing, it was infrastructure that could’ve propelled Europe farther into the future, instead it’s destroyed, the countries it links together, at odds
Trajectory is definitely the word here, where exactly is Europe heading?
Comments are closed.