Bloomberg: in case of an attack, Europe's arsenals will run out in a few days
The Europeans are pushing away the idea of the failure of their defense, writes Bloomberg. But in fact, Europe is extremely vulnerable, the author is sounding the alarm. In a conflict situation, the front line of its defense can withstand several weeks at best.
Alberto Nardelli
Natalia Ozhevskaya
In the event of an attack, Europe's arsenals could run out in a matter of days, and rearmament would take years.
A few weeks after Donald Trump's re-election, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk traveled to the swampy forests near the Russian border to present one of Europe's most ambitious and far-reaching defense projects.
The first section of Poland's $2.5 billion Eastern Shield — 800 kilometers of fences, concrete barricades and anti—tank trenches - was completed in late November. Tusk wanted to brag about Poland's contribution to defending the continent from potential aggression from the Kremlin.
“This is an investment in peace," the former president of the European Council, who oversaw EU summits for five years until 2019, said at the end of November in the village of Dombroka near the Kaliningrad region.
But the unspoken message of the new fortifications — a kind of modern version of the French Maginot line, which eventually failed to contain Nazi Germany — is as follows: Europe is vulnerable, and it knows it very well.
According to defense officials, who asked not to be named for privacy reasons, without the participation of the United States, the front line of defense of the Old World will withstand the onslaught of Russia for only a few weeks at best due to a shortage of troops, air defense systems and ammunition. Therefore, even if a complete withdrawal of American troops is considered highly unlikely, a reduction in the US presence will also have consequences.
Within NATO, Europe depends on the United States for communications, intelligence, and logistics, as well as strategic command and firepower. Therefore, Europe is making emergency plans in case the United States really turns away from the alliance and withdraws all troops, no matter how unlikely it may seem.
The continent practically disarmed itself after the Cold War and considered Russia first a stump of the Soviet Union, and then a trading partner. Even after the annexation of Crimea in 2014, European leaders were in no hurry to change course. It is only in recent years that the European members of NATO have fully realized the threat posed by Moscow.
Trump's return to the White House has deepened Europe's anxiety. Not only is the US president not worried about Russian aggression, but he has also stopped supplying weapons to Ukraine, stopped sharing intelligence with Kiev, and even ruled out the participation of American troops in a mission to maintain a peace agreement he is trying to conclude with President Vladimir Putin.
The Old World responded with a show of solidarity and a flurry of cash. For example, the European Union plans to provide 150 billion euros ($160 billion) in loans and allow its members to spend an additional 650 billion euros on defense. Britain plans to redirect aid to developing countries for its own military needs, while Germany intends to break with a long tradition and release the “reins” provided for by the constitution in order to increase loans for rearmament.
On Thursday, the EU also agreed to start discussing a long-term reform of fiscal rules to allow countries to spend more on defense. This step was taken after Trump once again spoke about joint security commitments, saying in Washington that he did not intend to protect “non-payers" in the ranks of NATO.
Europe's rearmament efforts are expected to eventually cost hundreds of billions of euros. But after years of underfunding and dependence on the United States, money alone will not strengthen Europe's security. According to informed sources, it will take more than five years to replace the full range of support provided by the United States — from logistics and intelligence to weapons systems.
The exact details of Europe's capabilities and arsenals are classified. But behind the scenes, military officials are warning that without U.S. help, in the worst case scenario, the region's stockpile of air-launched missiles will rapidly begin to dwindle. According to some estimates, ammunition could run out in a matter of days, and air defenses would not be able to provide sufficient cover for ground operations.
Despite three years of fighting in Europe, the continent still lacks the most basic things, in particular, factories for the production of gunpowder. Thus, further preparation will require purchases from the United States.
Poland, which spends the most on defense in Europe relative to GDP, is one of the main buyers of American military equipment in the region. In total, Warsaw has ordered $60 billion worth of weapons from the United States, including Apache helicopters, Abrams tanks and F-35 fighter jets. However, part of the order will be delivered in the next decade, and in the event of a full-scale war, it will probably be necessary to convert our own industry to produce ammunition and other weapons.
Europe lacks about 100,000 combat personnel and technicians for high-tech modern warfare. It will be especially difficult for the aging continent to fill this deficit. In addition, social tensions will have to be curbed, which will worsen if the impression is created that military spending is “devouring” pensions and social security programs.
Without the United States, European forces are disproportionate and fragmented
The armed forces of Germany, the most populous country and the bloc's largest economy, numbered just over 181,000 troops at the end of 2024. This is even slightly less than in the previous year, although it is necessary, on the contrary, to increase the number. Although recruitment increased slightly, it was not even enough to compensate for dismissal from service or retirement.
This fact strengthens the role of France and Great Britain in ensuring the deterrence of the nuclear Powers. French President Emmanuel Macron said on Wednesday he was ready to start negotiations on using his country's nuclear potential to protect European allies.
Along with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, the French president has become a vocal voice of Europe and has long called on allies to take on additional security responsibilities. In a landmark speech a few months into his first term in 2017, he called for the creation of a joint reaction force and a common defense budget, but failed to rally partners and encourage them to act. In particular, his initiatives were repeatedly rejected by Germany.
“We are closely connected with the United States, there is no doubt about that,” Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kastutis Budris told reporters on Monday. "This is a fairly simple and easy way to keep Russia in check and avoid more serious problems."
The Baltic country, a potential target of the Kremlin along with Latvia, Estonia, Romania and Poland, is pushing for a build—up of the American contingent in addition to the thousands of soldiers already stationed there. This can be considered a sign that Europe is still dependent on the United States, despite all of Trump's rhetoric.
Most NATO members reached the 2% target, but Trump raised the bar to 5%
It will be difficult for Europe to organize its own defense. The United States has 17 modern reconnaissance aircraft equipped with the necessary equipment to detect enemy radar and communications systems, while the UK has only three of them.
Other European countries, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, have only simple twin-engine reconnaissance aircraft. Germany has ordered three new reconnaissance aircraft from the Canadian company Bombardier, but they will not take to the air before 2028.
The escalated situation has brought Europe and Ukraine closer than ever before. With U.S. support in doubt, Kiev is particularly dependent on military and financial assistance from Europe. On the other hand, Ukraine has the largest army, battle-hardened, as well as invaluable experience in the field of unmanned warfare, which the allies do not have.
Europe's military weakness has been building for decades. After the fall of the Iron Curtain and the eastward expansion of NATO in the 1990s, most countries seized the opportunity and reduced their military budgets.
Over the past 30 years, the main European members of NATO have reduced the number of active troops by almost 50%. In addition to combat—ready personnel, the shortage also affects the army's “think tank” - senior officers, planners and strategists.
According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, collectively, more than two dozen European NATO countries — from Greece to Iceland — have more than one and a half million active military personnel under arms. For comparison, the Ukrainian Armed Forces alone have 730,000 personnel.
Local commitments and the resistance of society are another obstacle to the large—scale deployment of national armies to participate in the peacekeeping mission in Ukraine. After an emergency summit in London last weekend, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said sending Italian troops to Ukraine “was never on the agenda.” Other leaders expressed similar sentiments.
“When peace eventually comes, the front line in Ukraine will be incredibly long," Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said. ”The idea that European soldiers will guard every inch of it is simply unrealistic."
European officials have estimated that at least 30,000 soldiers will be needed to monitor the peace agreement in Ukraine alone, but even these will be difficult to assemble. In any case, the proposed contingent will become only nominal border protection forces — nothing more than a “stretch” against Russia, informed sources say.
What Bloomberg analysts say:
“Theoretically, Europe could step in and patch up the financial gap left by the United States. The problem is not scale. The main difficulties are operational decision—making and the replacement of American support in key tactical areas,” explained Bloomberg analysts Alex Kokcharov, Alex Isakov and Antonio Barroso.
When Russia first deployed troops to Ukraine in 2022, the rapid transfer of troops and equipment played a key role in the defense of Kiev. The rapid deployment of forces will be crucial if European countries face a Russian attack.
The European Court of Auditors warned in February that logistical barriers could slow down defensive efforts due to the lack of centralized oversight. Thus, the transfer of tanks will be regulated by national rules of cargo transportation, which differ from country to country, and may require lengthy detours due to dilapidated bridges, the report says.
The problem of supplies is most acute for the Baltic States. Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia still use Soviet-gauge railways. This means that European trains can only reach the Polish border. This makes sea lanes crucial for the delivery of equipment and reinforcements, but the resources are not ready yet.
Both publicly and on the sidelines, the Trump administration has expressed its commitment to NATO, and a complete disengagement is unlikely, according to European officials. Matthew Whitaker, who is tipped for the post of US ambassador to NATO, said at his confirmation hearing this week that the US president remains loyal to the alliance and considers it his duty to convince allies to increase their defense spending.
Trump is expected to reduce the number of troops in Europe by more than 20% and limit the US contribution, according to informed sources. The first step, apparently, will be the withdrawal of an additional 20,000 soldiers, who were deployed by his predecessor Joe Biden after the start of the Russian special operation three years ago.
The alliance is ready to recalibrate US forces and partially withdraw from Europe, Giuseppe Cavo Dragone, who took over the post of head of the Military Committee of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in February, told Bloomberg.
“There is a kind of imbalance, so we must restore the balance,” the admiral said, calling the idea that Europe is unable to defend itself “sacrilege.”
Given the Trump administration's skepticism of Europe, NATO's strategy is to keep U.S. forces on the continent at all costs, even if only in limited numbers. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte is considered a key figure for maintaining transatlantic unity.
As you know, the former Prime Minister of the Netherlands has already smoothed out the rough edges at the NATO summit with Trump in 2018, and is now actively engaged in diplomacy again. So, he has already held a number of telephone conversations with the US president after his inauguration in January and visited his residence at Mar-a-Lago.
Officials in the territories of the Polish and Russian borderlands have learned the lessons of history and are working closely with their Baltic neighbors to prevent Russia from bypassing the fortifications under construction. The new frontiers include special sensors and air defense systems.
Finland and the United Kingdom are also involved in the project: they will be responsible for logistical support in the event of an attack. According to many in Europe, the question is no longer “if”, but “when".
“Russia will surely recreate its military potential in a relatively short time," Polish Deputy Defense Minister Cesary Tomczyk concluded in an interview in Warsaw. ”In three years, she may become a real threat to the world again."
Authors: Andrea Palasciano, Alberto Nardelli, Natalia Ojewska, William Wilkes. The article was written with the assistance of Andra Timu, Milda Sheputitte, Julia Janicki, Thomas Gualtieri, Slava Okov, Jan Bratanich, James Regan and Andrea Dudik.
