An opinion piece published by The Parliament argues that Europe’s inability to act decisively on the global stage is no longer just a diplomatic problem, but a growing strategic vulnerability. Written by Tobias Cremer, the article contends that a fragmented defense system and slow political decision-making are leaving the European Union increasingly sidelined during major international crises.
The commentary points to a series of geopolitical shocks in 2026 that, according to the author, have highlighted Europe’s limited influence despite the EU being the world’s second-largest economy.
Among the examples cited are the United States’ actions toward Venezuela, renewed tensions surrounding Greenland, and negotiations related to the war in Ukraine, where European leaders were largely excluded from key discussions. The article also references developments in Iran and Lebanon, arguing that Europe has struggled to shape events in regions that directly affect its energy security, migration pressures and broader stability.
According to Cremer, decisions with major implications for Europe are increasingly being made without meaningful European participation.
The opinion piece argues that part of the problem lies within the EU’s institutional structure. Decision-making processes are described as slow, fragmented and vulnerable to obstruction, even after the political decline of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who had long been viewed by critics as a major obstacle to EU unity on foreign policy issues.
However, the article suggests the deeper challenge is Europe’s limited capacity to deter threats, defend itself and project power.
While the EU possesses significant economic strength, technological expertise and industrial infrastructure, Cremer argues that Europe has failed to convert those advantages into coherent military capability. The article attributes this weakness in part to the fact that defense policy has remained largely outside the framework of European economic integration and the EU single market.
According to the piece, this fragmentation has produced major inefficiencies. Europe and Ukraine continue to face delays and shortages in critical military supplies, including ammunition and air defence systems. Findings by former Finnish President Sauli Niinistö also indicated that fragmented defence procurement may increase costs by as much as 30%.
The article argues that such inefficiencies are particularly problematic at a time when European households are already under economic pressure.
To address these shortcomings, the opinion piece outlines five recommendations aimed at creating a genuine European defence single market.
The first proposal calls for a “Buy European” approach to defence procurement, with public spending focused on strengthening Europe’s own industrial base and reducing external dependencies.
Second, the article advocates modernising procurement systems to better support innovation and joint development projects, particularly in rapidly evolving technological sectors.
Third, Cremer argues that internal barriers to defence cooperation should be removed, allowing military equipment and technologies to move across EU borders more efficiently through streamlined certification and transfer systems.
The fourth recommendation focuses on increasing funding for defence innovation to prevent promising European technologies from failing to scale or becoming dependent on non-European actors.
Finally, the piece calls for a stronger cooperation agreement between the EU and NATO to ensure standardised technical requirements and interoperability between European military systems.
By Sabina Mammadli
