Spending targets, continued aid for Ukraine, and air defense will all be discussed when NATO defense ministers gather in Brussels on October 15 for their first official meeting since the military alliance's June summit in The Hague.
There the alliance of 32 nations committed to spending 5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) on defense by 2035. And now they need to work out how to actually achieve that. An estimated 3.5 percent of that 5 percent must go on what is known as “hard” military outlays, mostly spending on weapons, vehicles, and ammunition.
At the June gathering in the Netherlands, the United States, which has strongly pushed for increased European defense spending, will be interested to see what progress has been made to meet those targets and to check that the spending splurge isn’t backloaded toward the end of the 10-year deadline.
European nations can include their military aid to Ukraine when calculating their defense spending targets, so the upcoming meeting -- where Ukrainian Defense Minister Denys Shmyhal will participate -- is expected to address the financing of the war-torn country.
A meeting of the British-German-led Ukraine Defense Contact Group, also known as the Ramstein group, in which over 50 NATO and non-NATO countries coordinate military assistance to Kyiv, will follow directly after the NATO defense ministers' meeting.
Especially relevant to the effort to assist Ukraine in its war against Russia is the US-led Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL), an initiative that was launched in August. So far, approximately $2 billion worth of American arms designated for Ukraine, including Patriot and HIMARS missile systems, have been financially supported by Canada, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden. Another package worth $500 million is in the works, bankrolled by Belgium, Estonia, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, and Luxembourg. And it's possible that new packages will be announced in the coming days.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has praised the PURL initiative for enabling a steady flow of older US weapons to Ukraine, while Washington is happy for the boost to its defense industry’s revenues.
Frustrations About Increased European Defense Spending
But while the Europeans understand that increasing their defense spending is good for their relations with the US, there are also frustrations. One European diplomat, speaking anonymously because they weren't authorized to speak about the issue publicly, told RFE/RL that the current scheme is not optimal as "we essentially need to pay twice: first for the US defense industry and then for ourselves." However, another European diplomat, also not authorized to speak publicly, said that this “is the only way forward for now and that we will see more countries signing up" to the defense spending initiative.
The most pressing issue is not military aid to Ukraine but Europe's integrated air and missile defense. With NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte underlining that the alliance needs to up its air defense spending by 400 percent in the coming years, the issue has been forced front and center due to increased Russian drone incursions and violations of NATO airspace.
Essentially there are three Western air defense systems that can be used to counter the Russian threat: the American Patriot system, the German IRIS-T, and the Italian-French SAMP-T. Right now, the IRIS-T seems to be alliance's first choice -- even though all three can be used simultaneously.
While many European nations would like to acquire Patriots, the high demand means that there is waiting list, already stretching to several years. In addition, the Patriot is focused more on long-range ballistic missile defense, whereas the IRIS-T is tailored for quick response at close to medium ranges and is particularly effective against drones. The IRIS-T is also cheaper and, at least for now, available faster for potential buyers.
How Best To Protect European Skies?
The debate over the effectiveness of various air-defense systems reflects a broader discussion about how best to protect European airspace from a wide range of evolving threats. There are currently three different and overlapping concepts that are being worked on: NATO’s Eastern Sentry initiative, the EU’s so-called "drone wall," and its complementary Eastern Flank Watch, which the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen recently floated.
The Eastern Sentry, which was launched by the military alliance almost directly after Russian drones entered Polish airspace in September, will most likely become a permanent feature as NATO countries are in agreement that the military presence on its eastern border needs to be boosted. While several European countries have already contributed, mainly with jets, the question going forward is what more can be done.
This is where the Eastern Flank Watch initiative comes in. While still not fully fleshed out by the European Commission, the idea is to bolster the eastern land, air, and sea borders with four key elements: ground defenses such as fortifications and anti-mobility systems designed to hinder the movement of enemy forces; a "drone wall," which will detect, track, and intercept drones entering European airspace; maritime security in the Baltic and Black Seas; and a system to monitor space-based threats. With a potential common EU defense budget of over 130 billion euros ($151 billion) in the coming years, there is a lot that needs to be agreed on.
The most important meeting on October 15 might not be the NATO ministerial but the dinner of EU defense ministers later that evening. A less formal setting often means more candid conversations, for example about the actual merits of a drone wall. Both German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and French President Emmanuel Macron have questioned the need for such a sophisticated and costly system along the EU's eastern flank.
While European leaders are mostly in agreement that anti-drone systems of various sorts are needed, there are also concerns that drone technology and tactics are moving forward with such speed that a "drone wall" could be redundant and outdated when it launches in two or three years' time.
As shown by the four large drones that disturbed traffic over Copenhagen Airport on September 22, the threat can also come from inside the bloc, both land and sea. That has European leaders and officials questioning just how much a drone wall would really help.
