The European Union’s 'Churchill moment'

The Conference Hall at the Palacio de Pedralbes isn't usually the setting for declarations of war, but what transpired on the 18th of April at the CIDOB's War and Peace conference came close to a live autopsy of the transatlantic order. Under the title - which today sounds less provocative than sadly pragmatic - of Can Europe Defend Itself without the United States?, the continent's geopolitical elite came together to admit what would have been heresy in Brussels or Madrid three years ago: the "American umbrella" has been closed, and Europe is getting soaked.

I've covered my share of conferences where the coffee was stronger than the resolve. But what we heard from Josep Borrell and other experts who participated was more than another diagnosis of impending crisis. It was a confirmation of systemic shock. Europe is no longer in the waiting room but in the operating theater.

The death of 'strategic innocence'

In the past, the European project settled into a very comfortable position of peace under the premise that social spending was a feature of Europe, while security spending was left to America. That social contract has now been destroyed. Trump has transformed the U.S. from a protective ally into an "ideological predator".

"Trump has transformed the U.S. from a protective ally into an «ideological predator»"

The Greenland incident - repeatedly cited at panels as a national trauma for the EU - and the utter disregard for international law on display in the war against Iran have left Europe's capitals in an impossible bind. On one side, Russia is desiring not just Ukrainian territory but the fracture of European solidarity; on the other side, Washington is willing to use security as a bargaining chip to dismantle the EU's digital regulation and to impose onerous trade agreements. The conclusion of the experts was brutal: the U.S. is no longer our guarantor but a major factor of uncertainty.

The labyrinth of capacity: money or will?

The technical discussion - led by Camille Grand, secretary general of the defense employers' association, and by Daniel Fiott, senior researcher at the Elcano Royal Institute - put a finger on the sore spot. Europe's problem isn't a lack of money; in fact, military spending has skyrocketed since 2024. The problem is the Balkanization of spending.

Europe is now immersed in a national - not a community - arms race. The example of the FCAS (future fighter jet) illustrates this point: while France and Germany wrestle over intellectual property, Russia continues to learn lessons on the battlefields of Ukraine. Analysis of the defense industry proves that we have the technology (covering 98% of tactical needs) but that we lack the "enablers" once provided by the U.S.: intelligence satellites, strategic transport capabilities, and long-range missile defense.

"If U.S. forces evacuated their European bases tomorrow, the EU would be left blind and deaf within a matter of hours"

If U.S. forces evacuated their European bases tomorrow, the EU would be left blind and deaf within a matter of hours. We don't have a unified command-and-control system but 27 separate armies with different instruction manuals who can barely communicate without a NATO translator.

The nuclear factor: the umbrella of Versailles

Perhaps the most disruptive aspect of this analysis is the question of nuclear capability. The French proposal for an "Advanced Deterrence" system has ceased to be a fantasy of Gaullist grandeur and now seems necessary for survival.

"The fact that Berlin has agreed to join this nuclear steering group is probably the most significant tectonic shift in German foreign policy since 1945"

France has opened its nuclear doctrine to partners including Germany, Poland, the Nordic countries, and Spain (which for the moment prefers to decline that option). This isn't the engineering of a "European bomb" managed by the Commission but a coordination of exercises and deployments designed to send a message to Moscow: even when Washington doesn't respond, we have our own decision-making centers. The fact that Berlin has agreed to join this nuclear steering group is probably the most significant tectonic shift in German foreign policy since 1945.

The internal fracture of the Trojan horse in Budapest

One cannot speak of defense without speaking of unity, and here the analysis is gloomy. Viktor Orbán - and his systematic leaks of information to Moscow - was the elephant in the room throughout the seminar. It remains to be seen what will happen with the new prime minister in Hungary. Attention must also be given to the elections in Bulgaria.

"The veto system has become a tool for blackmail that keeps Europe from reacting at the speed of Russian drones"

Can there be a common defense if one member at the table is actively working for the adversary? The short answer is "no", and so the EU now faces the dilemma of unanimity. As Steven Everts has remarked, "We need unanimity in order to end unanimity." The veto system has become a tool for blackmail that keeps Europe from reacting at the speed of Russian drones. "Coffee geopolitics" (as when Orbán was fooled into leaving the room to enable a vote) is not a sustainable strategy for a military power.

The Global South and the loss of moral superiority

Professor Amitav Acharya injected a much-needed dose of reality: while Europe is navel-gazing, the rest of the world is regarding us with distrust. The double-standard between the bloc's response to the invasion of Ukraine and its silence (or complicity) in the war against Iran has alienated the Global South.

For countries such as India, Brazil, and South Africa, Europe has lost its status as a "normative power". If the EU wants to defend itself, it needs more than Patriot missiles in Ukraine (90% of which are still American, by the way); it also needs legitimacy. The EU-India agreement of 2026 is a step in the right direction, but it's a marriage of convenience, not of love. Europe is learning to be pragmatic by blows, abandoning its moral pedestal to buy security in a global market of transactional allies.

From defense to resilience: the role of Barcelona

Other major facets of the seminar were an appearance by Mayor Jaume Collboni and a focus on cities. In 2026, war isn't just about tanks but also electrical grids, cyberattacks on hospitals, and housing crises prompted by mass displacements.

"The welfare model - the right to housing and public health - is ultimately the value that makes Europe worth defending"

Barcelona is presenting itself as a node for "city diplomacy", the uptake being that European security is now playing out not just on the Estonian border but on the ability of large cities to resist social collapse. The welfare model - the right to housing and public health - is ultimately the value that makes Europe worth defending. A continent with iron defenses but fractured societies is a house of cards in the face of Putin's regime of disinformation.

The verdict: the end of the 'free ride'

The CIDOB seminar led to an inescapable conclusion: the era of Europe as a security "freeloader" is over. The Americans - both Democrat and Republican - have made it clear that Europe is a junior partner at best, and a nuisance at worst.

"The era of Europe as a security 'freeloader' is over"

Can Europe defend itself? Technically, yes - within about a decade. Currently, in political terms, not yet. The road to strategic autonomy is paved with industrial nationalism and institutional cowardice. As Borrell warned, the risk isn't only the potential for Russian invasion - it's the prospect of irrelevance. A Europe that can't protect its own undersea cables, satellites, or borders will devolve from a global player into a playground for the 21st-century powers.

In April of 2026, Barcelona acted as a loudspeaker for a Europe that's finally awake. The problem is that when the EU opened its eyes, it found itself alone in the room, with the door bolted from the outside. Now is the time to stop calling for the doorman and to build our very own exit.