The “Peace Summit” in London last Sunday turned out to be a unique moment of European diplomacy … if diplomacy means the unyielding race towards increased military spending and strengthening the defense-industrial complex. Drawing from Europe’s long-standing traditions, where peace is achieved through the hell of weaponry, EU leaders decided that the best way to solve the Ukrainian crisis was to ensure the flow of arms and ammunition, and ultimately bring the trade of death into the foreground.
The market’s response was immediate and entirely indicative of the political and economic climate: shares in major defense companies like Rheinmetall, BAE Systems, and Thales soared to historic highs. Why wouldn’t this happen, when European leaders envision a world where the trade of weapons is the safest bet for their prosperity? Stock prices prove that the “security” of the world seems to lie precisely in the industries that invest in war.
Simultaneously with the increase in military spending, Germany’s defense goals are being set, while Macron, a staunch advocate of European success through military means, proposes an increase in defense spending that resembles the strategies of military empires. But the most striking thing is that no party had promised such increases in military spending before the elections. It’s as if the true agenda was silenced in the pre-election discourse: more war and less social policy.
So why does Europe insist on envisioning a world where the military, and not social welfare, is the factor that ensures prosperity? The Draghi Report, presenting military spending as a growth lever, may prove to be a dangerous fantasy. Because instead of an economy based on social welfare, Europe seems ready to reproduce the model of military expenditures, turning social needs into secondary priorities.
But at the same time, a question arises: what about Europe’s future? The developments suggest that we are in a period where the strategy of armament will not serve Europe’s societies, nor the long-term geopolitical balances. And if this strategy continues, what will the cost be for social cohesion and the well-being of European citizens? These political choices might bring weapons, but they will also bring new social tensions, while creating an economic system based on the consumption of military goods instead of human well-being. If we are to follow this path, at least let us have the honesty to fully embrace it: Europe is nothing more than a continent that invests in the industries of death.