European Defense Commissioner Andrius Kubilius urged EU countries to keep defense spending high in the EU’s next long-term budget — or face delays in the bloc’s military ramp up.

“Please support the next [multi-annual financial framework] defense lines,” he said, speaking at POLITICO’s European Resilience Summit. Otherwise, he added, “we shall have less possibilities to build the defense systems we need to have, or to build our infrastructure in space. That’s very clear.”

His comments come as EU leaders are set meet Thursday to discuss the EU’s next long-term budget from 2028 to 2034. Over the weekend, the Council of the EU’s Irish presidency proposed cutting the Commission’s original proposal by around 8% to appease a German-led camp demanding major cuts. The cuts overwhelmingly affect EU-wide priorities such as competitiveness, defense and foreign aid.

Earlier this week, national delegations watered down a commitment to secure a deal on the budget by the end of the year.

EU money is key to “incentivize member states to go together for joint procurement, for joint development, for European development,” the former Lithuanian prime minister argued. That’s especially needed as defense spending remains too national-oriented and the defense industry too fragmented, he lamented.

“If we have less of those possibilities to incentivize member states, we shall not be able to change that situation, which is now really still not at the level we need in terms of defragmentation of European development,” the commissioner said.

PARIS — Fresh off his dominant victory in a center-left primary over the weekend, French presidential candidate Raphaël Glucksmann slammed U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to ease restrictions on Russian diesel exports as a move that benefits the Kremlin at Europe’s expense.

“There is, at the head of the United States, someone who is either a useful idiot or an agent of the destruction of European strength and freedom,” Glucksmann said at POLITICO’s Competitiveness Summit in Paris. “[Russia’s war against Ukraine] targets us directly, us Europeans, and we are alone.”

The MEP also insisted that sending his far-right rival Marine Le Pen to the Elysée Palace in 2027 would be a victory for Russian leader Vladimir Putin and a step toward “the defeat of the European continent.”

Le Pen has previously expressed “a form of admiration” for Putin, and her party, the National Rally, received a loan from a Russian-linked bank in 2014. Le Pen said her party borrowed money overseas because French banks refused loans and that the loan had no impact on her political stances. The party has since paid back the funds.

Though Le Pen condemned Russia’s all-out war in Ukraine, some elected officials within her party remain strongly opposed to helping Ukraine and favor a stronger relationship with Russia.

At a POLITICO event last month, Le Pen said she believed France could provide Ukraine with military training and assistance but could no longer afford financial support given France’s budgetary constraints.

Le Pen currently boasts a double-digit lead over her competitors for the first round of next year’s presidential election, according to POLITICO’s Poll of Polls. Glucksmann is in fourth, trailing former Prime Minister Edouard Philippe and far-left candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon. France’s presidential election will go to a runoff if neither of the top two candidates gets more than 50% of the vote in the first round.

In his interview with POLITICO, Glucksmann, one of the race’s strongest pro-European voices, doubled down on his support for a European Sky Shield for Ukraine and the need for a more robust, sovereign European defense industry — a push also endorsed by French President Emmanuel Macron and widely shared across the French political spectrum.

“For decades,” Glucksmann said, “we have delegated our sovereignty and our security to Washington, and we are now realizing what a mistake that was.”

In practical terms, however, Europe remains split over whether non-EU countries should be allowed to tap its defense money. France is leading the push to limit the outsiders’ access to the European Competitiveness Fund.

Glucksmann also said Europe should take on joint debt to fund defense projects — a proposal Germany and other fiscally conservative EU members have been loath to consider — instead of attempting member-state-to-member-state projects like the failed Franco-German next-generation fighter jet.

Without joint investment, he said, “no European countries, including Germany, will be able to face, in the short term, the war of the future” against powers like China, Russia and the U.S.

“It’s a life or death question,” Glucksmann said.

Wars abroad, protests at home

In a sweeping interview, Glucksmann outlined how his foreign policy, if elected president in April 2027, would involve strengthening ties with countries in central and eastern Europe instead of courting leaders like Putin or China’s Xi Jinping.

The next president, he said, “should go to Warsaw; should go to Tallinn,” rather than Beijing or Moscow. The MEP has frequently criticized Macron for hosting Putin at a lavish ceremony in the Versailles Palace in 2017 and offering Xi a tour of his grandmother’s village in southwest France in 2024.

The center-left candidate said Europe needed to “leverage its position of strength” when it comes to negotiations with China, with whom the bloc is trying to reduce its €1 billion-a-day trade deficit. He also said that the EU should stick by its goal of phasing out combustion engine vehicles by 2035 and invest in electric vehicles so as not to “abdicate” the sector to the Chinese.

Glucksmann is pitching himself to voters as a French president who will confront what he considers to be strongmen at the head of global powers like Xi, Putin and Trump.

With the presidential campaign under way, Glucksmann is also looking to strengthen his credentials on the domestic front. He said recent protests by high school students — which center, among other grievances, on the lack of substitute teachers in France, overcrowded classrooms and the run-down state of several schools — are “perfectly legitimate and justified.” He also argued that teachers are underpaid.

NATO’s top commander U.S. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich on Monday vowed to block, blunt and break any Russian attack as part of a new “Theory of Victory,” and underlined that alliance troops would fight even if U.S. forces were engaged elsewhere.

Speaking at the Warsaw Security Forum, Grynkewich outlined how the 32-member alliance would respond to an invasion of NATO territory as concerns grow that Russia could be capable of attacking a NATO member by the end of the decade.

“Our alliance exists to preserve peace,” he said, “but let there be no doubt: should war come, we will block, blunt any attack, and then, if it does not cease, we will break the forces conducting aggression against us.”

The rare intervention by the four-star general to discuss a military blueprint underscores NATO’s effort to deter Russia. It is also aimed at sending a message of NATO unity after a grueling year for the alliance, which was rocked by Donald Trump’s threats to annex Greenland and infighting over the U.S.-Israeli war in Iran.

Under the three-part blueprint, NATO would initially use land-based troops — buttressed by air, naval, cyber and space capabilities — to stop an assault, targeting attacking forces and preventing them from seizing territory, Grynkewich said.

NATO would then use sensors and autonomous systems among other capabilities to “overwhelm enemy formations … and their advance,” he said, before using “highly effective precision munitions” and unmanned systems if necessary to “break the [enemy] warfighting system” and “everything that supports” it.

Lithuanian Defense Minister Robertas Kaunas said the theory laid out by Grynkewich “will send a strong message to our adversaries that we are going to defend ourselves.”

NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe said he does “not assess that conflict is imminent or inevitable.” But “we will … ensure any attack against any ally proves utterly futile.”

The speech describes a more forceful response if a foe attacks, but its credibility depends on allies having the forces, infrastructure, and coordination to implement the plan.

Asked whether the plan factored in a scenario where the U.S. was engaged elsewhere, Grynkewich said: “It absolutely does account for that, and in fact, it must.”

Under Trump, the U.S. has sought to refocus its military on other priorities such as the Indo-Pacific, homeland security and the Western Hemisphere. U.S. ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker said in Warsaw on Monday that Europe only ranks fourth among Washington’s strategic concerns.

The Pentagon has already cut its contributions to NATO crisis forces and is set to unveil a review of U.S. forces in Europe by the end of the year.

“No one should question the commitment of the United States to this alliance,” Grynkewich argued, but added that “ultimately, it’s a political decision about who’s providing troops where.”

Camille Grand, NATO’s former assistant secretary-general for defense investment, said the plan was “a very deliberate effort” to signal that the alliance would be ready to fight with or without large-scale involvement of U.S. forces.

“For my country, fighting with Russians is with or without Americans,” said a separate senior European defense official, who was granted anonymity to speak freely. “We expect them to come, but if they won’t, we will fight anyway.”

Grand added that the blueprint is also an indication that NATO is ready to take a bolder approach toward Moscow by threatening the destruction of its war machine even deep behind the front lines.

That comes as Moscow sent a letter to NATO last month threatening to use its nuclear arsenal if the alliance tried to isolate its Kaliningrad exclave.

Grynkewich warned that NATO would be ready to respond — even with its nuclear arsenal.

“Should an adversary threaten escalation by saber-rattling, or should one actually decide to escalate during conflict, it will not fracture our alliance,” he said. “We should take comfort in our ability to deliver mass effects and the implicit warning that we could match any enemy move up the escalation ladder.”

Fast jede Nacht überzieht Russland die Ukraine mit Drohnen- und Raketenangriffen, um die Zivilbevölkerung zu zermürben. Doch abseits des Terrors aus der Luft kommt Moskau militärisch kaum voran. Die wahre Strategie des Kremls zielt längst auf ein anderes Schlachtfeld: die politische Erschöpfung Europas und der USA.

Im Gespräch mit POLITICO-Reporterin Rixa Fürsen teilt Nico Lange, Direktor des Instituts für Risikoanalysen und Internationale Sicherheit (IRIS), seine aktuellen Eindrücke aus dem Kriegsgebiet. Er analysiert, warum Putin trotz militärischer Stagnation auf einen politischen Sieg hofft und wie die deutsche Furcht vor Eskalation diesen Plan unfreiwillig begünstigt.

Die Folge offenbart die konkreten Konsequenzen westlicher Zögerlichkeit – von verweigerten Waffensystemen bis zum passiven Umgang mit der russischen Schattenflotte in der Ostsee. Ein ungeschönter Blick auf die strategischen Fehler der Bundesregierung und die reale Gefahr, dass mangelnde Entschlossenheit den Krieg am Ende für ganz Europa gefährlicher macht.

Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Rixa Fürsen, Maximilian Stascheit und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig.

Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren.

POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH
Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin
Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0
information@axelspringer.de
Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B
USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390
Geschäftsführer: Christoph Eck-Schmidt, Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna