Guns, Butter, and Sovereignty: Europe’s Future Hinges on Overcoming the Security Fragmentation Trap
Strategic convergence on security is no longer optional—it is the bedrock upon which Europe can salvage its economic and political integration project. It may also prove successful at the ballot box. A commentary by Marco Buti, and Francesco Nicoli
Europe is a continent under siege. To begin with, consider the Ceuta crisis and the subsequent suspension of the Schengen agreement toward Spain by Italy.
Add to this a series of “hybrid warfare” episodes: an explosives-laden drone that miraculously failed to detonate against a Ukrainian plane at Leipzig airport, the explosion of a munitions factory in Colleferro, near Rome, and that of an arms manufacturing plant in Bulgaria—both part of a support program for Ukraine.
Since 2022, more than 200 documented hybrid warfare incidents have targeted the European Union (EU). Compounding these, are the pressures exerted by the Trump administration on NATO, culminating in a document—sent, according to Bloomberg, to alliance nations—aimed at verifying allies’ ideological alignment with the MAGA agenda, as well as their personal loyalty to the president himself.
These episodes, although seemingly distant, share a common cause: European divisions on defense and the resulting absence of genuine collective security tools.
Europe is entangled in a security “fragmentation trap”: perceived short-term national costs of common defense prevail over its real, medium-to-long-term collective benefits.
It is a classic vicious cycle: divisions prevent Europe from adopting effective common institutions and policies, and in their absence, adversaries successfully exploit these very rifts to widen them and divide the continent further.
Whoever pushed the masses of migrants toward Ceuta aimed not only at placing the Spanish government in a difficult position, but also at disrupting European unity (a plan that succeeded completely).
Similarly, the continuous expansion of Russian-driven hybrid warfare is only possible because our fragmented security institutions has proven incapable of reacting adequately, not least because the absence of a true European intelligence agency renders counterintelligence operations far more complex.
Finally, the demand for personal loyalty to President Trump and ideological alignment with MAGA has laid bare the increasingly neo-feudal character of the relationship between the US and its allies.
In this administration’s understanding of global power, alliances are not institutional relationships among sovereign states: the state itself is merely an instrument of the supreme leader, and loyalty is owed to him and him alone.
The objective is clear: the collapse of international law—upon which both NATO and the EU are built—and the transformation of European security from a public alliance codified in treaty into a private pact of vassalage.
The situation is unsustainable, yet the EU appears paralyzed. In many countries, it is taken for granted that the political room for a surge of pride (or at least a flicker of dignity) is severely limited.
Next year, seven countries will go to the polls, including France, Italy, Poland, and Spain, which together account for 48% of the EU population. Here, far-right nationalist, anti-European, and often pro-Russian forces are dictating the policy agenda to both governments and oppositions.
To break the impasse preventing a path toward geopolitical emancipation, the “fragmentation trap” must be confronted. How?
Political incentives must change.
First, the “butter vs. guns” narrative must be challenged: without stepping up the investments in security, there will be neither guns (or their modern equivalent) nor butter (welfare transfers).
Second, military spending today mostly consists of investments in technological innovation with significant positive spillovers for growth: a security policy is, for all intents and purposes, an industrial policy.
Third, as threats against European countries reach the heart of the EU, pro-European political forces must convince citizens that we face an imminent threat: it is astonishing how an attack such as the sabotage of the Colleferro factory passed almost unnoticed in Italy.
Only by unifying its security can Europe resist both Trump’s neo-feudal tendencies and Putin’s imperial ambitions, while simultaneously avoiding a damaging and ineffective national arms race. Without a step forward on common defense, Europe will remain condemned to be a hunting ground for major powers—now more than ever engaged in a new global-scale divide et impera.
Moreover, we will face the real threat of a national arms race, conducted by individual countries and potentially driven by ultranationalist forces. This national armaments race would prove far more costly than a shared defense and could even put peace within Europe at risk.
The ramifications of a common EU security policy (or lack thereof) are all-encompassing: either Europe crosses the rubicon on security, or it will also fail to deliver on its economic policy agenda too, and its core competencies will be progressively eroded.
It is wholly illusory to believe Europe can withstand Trump’s trade and digital pressures, or push forward with the Draghi-Letta agenda on competitiveness and the Single Market, without strategic convergence on defense. Integration will be gradually undermined, even in areas of strict EU competence.
Hence, progress on non-EU competencies such as defense is key to shield EU treaty-based powers from the nationalist shockwaves, not the other way around.
The only alternative to common defense is a weakening Europe, progressively carved up among new global empires, and progressively at risk of internal conflict.
Yet, this is not an inevitable outcome.
Actually, there may be in many EU countries a political demand waiting for the an adequate political supply.
Polls show strong public support across national populations for viewing defense as a European public good to be provided centrally and funded jointly, especially when plans are ambitious.
Europeans may just be growing tired of half-baked solutions and expect national leaders to finally deliver the security and prosperity Europe needs. Pursuing this goal is a message that, if delivered with conviction and resolve, can also prove to be a winning strategy at the ballot box.
A previous version of this article was published by Il Sole 24 Ore
IEP Bocconi does not express opinions of its own. The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the authors.
