European Defense Planning and the Ukraine Crisis: Two Contrasting Views
As the Ukrainian crisis continues, it is now clear that Europe is facing a new strategic environment and needs to adapt.
These developments challenge the expeditionary posture adopted by NATO over the last twenty years, and imply a need to rethink the demand for strengthening collective defense and reassurance capabilities. The two papers presented in this issue approach this question from different angles. On the one hand, an outlook based on the Estonian experience as a frontline state, supports the idea to reinvest in heavy conventional capabilities. On the other hand, a more organizational approach, embodied by the concept of “joint force generation,” which proposes keeping the same force structure while binding European militaries together with common support platforms.
This Focus Stratégique was published with the support of RESET Program.
Download the full analysis
This page contains only a summary of our work. If you would like to have access to all the information from our research on the subject, you can download the full version in PDF format.
European Defense Planning and the Ukraine Crisis: Two Contrasting Views
Author(s)
Related centers and programs
Discover our other research centers and programs
Security Studies Center
Heir to a tradition dating back to the founding of Ifri, the Security Studies Center provides public and private decision-makers as well as the general public with the keys to understanding power relations and contemporary modes of conflict as well as those to come. Through its positioning at the juncture of politics and operations, the credibility of its civil-military team and the wide distribution of its publications in French and English, the Center for Security Studies constitutes in the French landscape of think tanks a unique center of research and influence on the national and international defense debate.
Find out more
Discover all our analyses
EUDIS, HEDI, DIANA: What's behind Three Defense Innovation Acronyms?
In Europe, with Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine showing little sign of abating, a persistent gap remains between security needs and defense spending. According to a 2006 commitment enshrined at the 2014 Wales NATO summit, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) members should disburse no less than 2% of their national gross domestic product (GDP) on defense, out of which 20% is to be spent on equipment and research and development. In 2024, only 23 Allies out of 32 are expected to meet or exceed this target, though a significant improvement from only three in 2014. This total includes the United States (US) devoting 3.38% of its GDP to defense, constituting almost 70% of all NATO member defense spending combined.
From Ukraine to Gaza: Military Uses of Artificial Intelligence
The wars in Ukraine and Gaza show us the extent to which artificial intelligence (AI) has become integral to battlefield operations.
French thinking on AI integration and interaction with nuclear command and control, force structure, and decision-making
This paper analyses the French literature on France’s perception of military AI, especially its consequences on strategic systems and competition, and nuclear deterrence.
The Future of Europe’s Strategic Deterrence is (also) at Sea
A cursory look at both France and the UK suggests that the future of European nuclear deterrence is at sea.