Europe grapples with defense independence as US steps back

ALDEN BIESEN, Belgium (CN) — European leaders gathered Thursday at a Belgian castle before this weekend's Munich Security Conference, united on the need for Europe to become more independent from the U.S. — but divided on how fast to move and whether to wait for everyone to agree.

The central question: Should Europe rush to buy weapons now for immediate security, even if that means depending on U.S. arms makers — or build its own defense industry for long-term independence, even if that takes years?

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has been making the case all week that "Europe's independence moment is now." Her pitch: Europe needs to spend way more on defense to rely less on the U.S., but that money won't help if it just buys U.S. weapons. So Europe has to favor its own defense companies while opening markets to new partners.

They didn't have to wait long for Washington's answer. Hours into the summit, Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon's top policy official and chief architect of Trump's strategy, told NATO defense ministers that "Europe must assume primary responsibility for its own conventional defense."

Speaking for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who didn't attend, Colby called it "NATO 3.0" — a return to Cold War burden-sharing after three decades of Europeans relying on U.S. military power while spending relatively little.

"A strategy that pretends the United States can indefinitely serve as the primary conventional defender of Europe while also carrying the decisive burden everywhere else is neither sustainable nor prudent," Colby said. The U.S. would focus on defending the homeland, the Western Hemisphere and the Indo-Pacific, leaving Europe to provide most forces needed to stop Russian aggression.

It's an official end to the U.S. role as Europe's conventional military protector, though the U.S. would keep its nuclear umbrella and provide some help. Colby framed it as "strategic pragmatism," noting Europe is "wealthy, populous, and has formidable industrial and technological capabilities."

The EU’s ‘Greenland moment’

"This is the Greenland moment for Europe," Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said, echoing French President Emmanuel Macron, referring to Trump's January threats to seize the Danish autonomous island. For Denmark — usually a champion of open markets — to embrace "buy Danish and buy European" policies shows how much has changed.

European public opinion backs the shift. A poll this week showed most people in France and Germany don't believe enemies would be afraid to attack them because of their relationship with the U.S. In Germany, half the adults polled called the U.S. an unreliable ally. "Far from taking the transatlantic deterrence offered by NATO for granted, the European public hardly believe it exists," pollsters found.

"The old world is gone," Frederiksen said.

Trump's pressure has given European officials cover to push through industrial protection measures they've wanted for years. Even while calling for "buy European" rules in defense, they've signed major free trade deals with India, Mercosur, Mexico and Indonesia — specifically to find alternatives to Washington and Beijing.

"We need to diversify, de-risk our Europe" and protect "European content" in key industries, Macron told reporters alongside German Chancellor Friedrich Merz as they entered the venue. He threatened to let willing countries move ahead without unanimous agreement — a warning aimed at Hungary and other holdouts.

"If there are some countries that don't want to be there, then some of us will have to go ahead," Frederiksen said. She opposed the "two-speed Europe" idea for years, she acknowledged, but "some governments are pro-Russian and actually against Europe."

Still, the immediate crisis is energy — and the climate policies that make it expensive. European factories pay roughly triple what U.S. plants pay for electricity, according to EU numbers, hitting energy-intensive industries hardest. "The petrochemical sector and the steel sector will collapse in Europe in the coming years" without help, Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever warned.

Leaders want major changes to Europe's carbon pricing rules, though that means choosing between climate goals and keeping factories open.

NATO chief Mark Rutte has already told European lawmakers they're "dreaming" if they think massive defense spending alone will free them from U.S. military power anytime soon. Real independence would mean spending 10% of their economies on defense, not the 5% they're discussing — and even that wouldn't work for at least a decade, according to Rutte.

Despite the friction, few analysts expect a full break. Europe lacks alternatives — it can't pivot to China or Russia — and the U.S. needs NATO to maintain its superpower status. "The two are stuck with each other, in an increasingly loveless, if still convenient, marriage," wrote Dan Alamariu, chief geopolitical strategist at Alpine Macro, in a report shared with Courthouse News. The more likely path: messy coexistence with periodic trade clashes and louder rhetoric, alongside continued alignment on Russia, intelligence sharing and China policy.

Thursday's meeting produced no binding decisions — just prep work for the formal EU summit in March. This weekend's Munich Security Conference marks exactly one year since Vice President JD Vance's surprise speech demanding European burden-sharing sent shockwaves through the conference.

What seemed impossible then — Europe reshaping its defense and economy independent of the U.S. — is now official policy.

Courthouse News correspondent Yuval Molina is based in Brussels, Belgium.