A ‘Vision 2030’ for Europe’s security

Last weekend, the 61st Munich Security Conference took place in Germany. The agenda was linked to a “pivotal” moment of change, including a new US administration, a new cycle of European legislature in Brussels and the upcoming German parliamentary elections.

One of the panels was titled “Ready, Steady, 2030? Accelerating the Balkans’ EU accession.” I would like to adopt the same logic and link it to some familiar narratives for Middle Eastern politics, based on the conference’s outcomes, to offer my own predictions for the future of Europe up to 2030. In other words, this article aims to suggest a “Vision 2030” for European security.

Firstly, it seems the trend in Europe is toward a more neo-realist approach, with the prioritization of defense. This will certainly be developed, as expenditure will increase. Most speakers agreed that Europe needs to increase its defense spending: currently, the NATO-mandated minimum is 2 percent of gross domestic product, but this is expected to increase to 3 percent.

US President Donald Trump has urged NATO’s European members to spend 5 percent of their national income on defense. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte has also urged member states to increase their defense spending. And in her address, “The EU in the World,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed an increase in public investments, including defense expenditure.

Secondly, relations between Europe and the US are at a transformative stage. Panels that involved the US included titles such as, “Doing More with Less US? Strengthening European Defense,” “The US in the World,” “Strategic investment: The Future of US-Ukraine Security Cooperation,” “Pitfalls and Priorities: The New US Administration’s Middle East Policy,” and “Pay or Prey? NATO, the US and Transatlantic Security.”

In his speech, US Vice President J.D. Vance discussed the importance of shared values, which he accused European countries, including the UK, of retreating from, while ignoring voter worries on free speech and migration. This speech was labeled “brilliant” by Trump, but it was met with silence in the hall. This can be seen as illustrative of a period of growing tension and uncertainty in Europe-US relations. Markus Soeder, the minister-president of Bavaria and leader of the Christian Social Union party, acknowledged that Europe’s relations with the US need “a fresh start.” He added: “We should not be complaining … We need a change.” The European Vision 2030 might require an alternative method to deal with this US administration.

Zanny Minton Beddoes, the editor-in-chief of The Economist, who moderated the session on “Building or Burning Bridges: Economic and Development Cooperation Amid Multipolarization,” argued that within three weeks a new administration in the US had ended the previous geopolitical status quo in many fundamental ways. It did this through very different approaches to conflict areas (e.g., the Middle East and Ukraine) and a fundamentally different approach to foreign assistance and how the global trading system and tariffs should look. Trump’s plan to enforce a 25 percent tariff on all steel and aluminum imports from next month was a sign there are very clear rifts between Washington and Europe on several matters, from trade to dealing with Russia.

The third point on European security concerns policies toward saving the EU’s economies, securing its interests and offering agreements that would work for all, ensuring all members are prosperous and secure.

The European Vision 2030 might require an alternative method to deal with this US administration

Dr. Diana Galeeva

Fourthly, expansionist Russian policies are another major point of concern for the future of European security. One of the dominant concerns is the outcome of the Ukraine war. The new US administration’s approach does not make it any easier, as American and Russian officials met in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday to lay the groundwork for peace talks. The Ukrainian and European leaders were not invited, but they noted that they must be included for any ceasefire to be reliable.

Instead, on Monday, an emergency summit of European leaders took place in Paris to discuss the Ukraine war. There, Von der Leyen noted that Ukraine deserved “peace through strength.” In both cases, talks without key players (in the first case, without Ukraine and the EU and, in the second, without Russia) further complicate the European security agenda.

Therefore, Russian wars, including hybrid conflicts such as in the Baltic Sea or in the post-Soviet space, including Georgia, Armenia and Moldova, are a complicated and urgent question. This was seen in Munich during discussions in panels such as “Down to the Wire: Countering Hybrid Warfare in the Baltic Sea,” “Nuclear Multipolarity” and “Spotlight on Georgia.”

One of the central themes was multipolarization. In the panel on “Building or Burning Bridges,” the growing number of actors with importance in terms of global decision-making was noted.

The conference discussed matters relating to the Middle East, in addition to China and Venezuela. This links to another direction and challenge that has been discussed in Europe: the growing importance and influence of the countries of the Global South. It can be further discussed within the expanding BRICS agenda. Finding a collective approach based on pluralism, democracy and “defending philosophical ideas, which behave as the engine of our prosperity or stability here in Europe,” as suggested by Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares Bueno, would offer another dimension of the Vision 2030 for European security to share with the rest of the world.

While Russia, which is part of BRICS, is perceived as trying to burn bridges, the Europeans should try to rebuild them. This can be another fundamental agenda for Europe up to 2030: rebuilding bridges with the rest of the world.

To sum up, the Vision 2030 for European security is based on a neo-realist approach, increasing defense spending and prioritizing security matters. This is because, as Von der Leyen stated, peace comes through strength. And Europe must be stronger than ever. It faces challenges with the US administration, which could require Europe to find new ways to maintain its defense, as well as challenges in the economic system, with the US and other actors aiming to reshape the existing financial systems. The imperialist vision of Russia also directly challenges European stability and security by conducting hybrid wars on European territory. In addition, it needs to continue finding ways to attract the rest of the world, while other players aim to challenge the existing global order.

• Dr. Diana Galeeva is an academic visitor to Oxford University. X: @Dr_GaleevaDiana