International crises and the various war fronts continue to occupy a central space in the public debate, but the perception of European citizens is gradually shifting from military fear to economic fear. In all countries of the sample interviewed for Monday’s Il Sole 24 Ore (Italy, France, Germany, the United Kingdom and Denmark), the share of citizens who associate war with negative economic consequences clearly exceeds that of those who fear direct military involvement. International crises are mainly linked to increased taxes, reduced public spending, economic slowdown and loss of financial stability. It is a less spectacular, but more concrete fear, which is set in a context already marked by inflation, high energy prices and widespread uncertainty.
Fears of France, Germany and the UK
In France, this sensitivity takes on a particularly marked social connotation. Geopolitical tensions are perceived as reducing the margins of intervention of the state, putting pressure on the welfare model and increasing the risk of new social fractures. The focus is less on military scenarios and more on the ability of institutions to continue supportingfamilies and businesses.
In Germany, the connection between war and economy appears even more structural. Conflicts are interpreted as a systemic risk for the country, capable of affecting industrial competitiveness, exports and overall economic stability. A reading that is also found in the United Kingdom, where concerns related to the international scenario are compounded by domestic frailties, from inflation to the cost of living, in a context made more complex by the post-Brexit situation. Here too, economic fear clearly prevails over military fear.
Denmark and Italy
Denmark represents a somewhat distinct case. The solidity of welfare and high trust in institutions help to contain immediate anxiety, but do not eliminate the perception of risk. This is the country where greater attention to the strategic and territorial dimension also emerges, particularly in relation to Greenland, perceived more as a potential area of future tension than as a current crisis. However, even in this case, the dominant concern remains the medium- and long-term effects on the national economy.
Moreover, international crises are not perceived as automatically strengthening the European Union. On the contrary, for many citizens the main effect is to highlight political rifts and divergences between states, rather than to foster a common response. Except for the Danes, who are perhaps reassured these days by a Europe that is close and united in the defence of Greenland, in Italy as in all the other countries analysed, the opinion prevails that the current crises make the Union more divided and more fragile. The image that emerges is that of a Europe struggling to turn emergencies into opportunities for cohesion.