Nov 2025 – In-person event

---

Background

---

NATO has guaranteed our common defence reliably since the 1950’s. The new US administration, through Vice President Vance and Secretary of Defence Hegseth have made it very clear that in the future, Europe has to shoulder the bulk of its conventional defence.

When NATO has agreed to a 5% target for defence expenditure by 2035, the EU has also stepped up in providing financial aid, removing operational obstacles and facilitating military mobility, and is now proposing specific defence projects such as a drone wall.

The United Kingdom is indispensable to protect the continent of Europe.

This event will contribute to discussing how the new security architecture of Europe could look like.

---

Summary of event

---

The panel discussion examined the urgent need for Europe to assume greater responsibility for its own defence as the United States increasingly prioritises strategic competition with China over European security concerns. The speakers emphasised that this represented a fundamental shift in transatlantic relations, requiring Europeans to develop independent military capabilities whilst maintaining NATO's operational framework.

The discussion highlighted three critical challenges facing European security. >Russia's nuclear deterrence capabilities had proven to be "the strongest weapon" in the Ukraine conflict, yet Continental Europe lacked equivalent strategic autonomy in this domain.

• Analysts warned of a potential conventional force’s imbalance, noting that if Russia chose to "escalate" rather than demobilise its forces, Europe would face "1.5 million trained soldiers" along the line from Moscow to Berlin, compared to significantly fewer European troops.
• Speakers stressed the necessity of integrating Ukraine's "800,000 strong troops" into European security architecture, recognising Ukraine as a vital "security provider for us" rather than merely a recipient of aid.

Key points raised during the discussions included:

• Establishing strategic enablers: Europe must develop independent capabilities in satellite communications, long-range transport, and in-flight refuelling, as these functions had historically been provided by the United States but were now essential for autonomous European operations.
• Creating a European Security Council: Panellists advocated for a new institutional framework operating on majority voting principles, which could serve as "a bridge to the United Kingdom" and integrate non-EU members including Norway and potentially Ukraine into continental defence planning.
• Investing in defence industrial capacity: The priority was to shift European defence industries "from peacetime inefficiency to wartime productivity", expanding ammunition production, coordinating procurement, and standardising equipment across nations to eliminate wasteful duplication.
• Developing rapid reaction forces: Europe required "high-readiness, multinational rapid reaction forces" deployable within days to any threatened location, trained under common doctrine and capable of operating independently of immediate American support.
• Enhancing civil resilience: Countries must improve protection of critical infrastructure, secure energy grids and data systems, and counter hostile disinformation narratives, with speakers pointing to Nordic countries as exemplars of effective civil preparedness.

The question-and-answer session addressed several contentious issues, including the political feasibility of increased defence spending when domestic budgets faced competing pressures, the potential role of European nuclear deterrence, and the challenge of combating Russian disinformation campaigns. On the topic of conscription, it was noted that NATO's commitment to deploy "80,000 troops" along an "800-kilometre" defence line raised questions about mobilising personnel and upgrading facilities that had been sold off or repurposed since the end of the Cold War. Improved service accommodation, competitive salaries, and enhanced reservist programmes were suggested solutions to address recruitment challenges.

Speakers acknowledged that Britain remained "five or six years behind where we should be" in preparing citizens for contemporary security challenges, though they emphasised the need for sustained public communication campaigns to build support for necessary defence investments.

The discussion concluded with recognition that Europe faced "a moment of renewal" requiring strategic maturity rather than despair. Whilst the challenge of building European defence capacity was substantial, speakers stressed that the alternative—continued dependence on potentially unavailable American reinforcement—posed unacceptable risks to continental security.