To ‘regime’ augmented alert defense in terms of EU This year the Prime Minister, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, will be found at this year’s TIF, at the inauguration of which he will address his speech tomorrow (6.9.25).
And this is because especially after mid -August, when the Trump -Putin meeting in Alaska took place and then the Trump meeting with the leaders of Europe’s largest forces in Washington, increased (instead of decreasing as expected by some) by the Russian aggression against Moscow in Kiev, which hit the EU Commission offices (August 28, 2025).
Immediately afterwards, and while fears of “Greek -style” fiscal crashes in France (following Bairo’s request for a vote of confidence by the French Parliament for September 8, 2025), a Community level of EU leaders for EU leaders for October 20, had been decided.
Characteristic of upgrading the color of the defensive “alarm” in the EU was the yesterday’s (3.9.25), a statement by the Vice President of the Commission, responsible for EU external affairs, Kaya Callas, according to which “It is clear that Russia shows no real desire to end this war. We saw, last night, attacking Ukraine again. We have to deal with the consequences of this. For Europe, this can only mean one thing: More military, diplomatic and financial support for Ukraine. In the event of a ceasefire, a powerful Ukrainian army is the strongest security guarantee. That is why we also support them with training, funding and equipment. “
She gave an even more international dimension to the war in Ukraine, saying that “While Western leaders gather in the context of diplomacy, an authoritarian alliance is seeking a quick course towards a new world order. Looking at President Si standing next to the leaders of Russia, Iran and North Korea in Beijing today, these are not just obvious visuals. This is an immediate challenge for the international system -based system. And it is not only symbolic: Russia’s war in Ukraine is supported by Chinese support. These are realities that Europe has to face ».
At the same time that Europeans suggest “More military, diplomatic and financial support for Ukraine” (Although there is no reason for the economic impact of a new phase of deterioration in Ukraine throughout the European economy!), Due to Russia’s “reluctance” to end the war in Ukraine, They are afraid that the United States – on this autumn – will decide to reduce their military presence in Europe.
These fears were clearly expressed by the official specialized Think Tank of the European Union for Security Studies in a recent publication (late July 2025), dedicated to two extremely important military reports expected within the next few days on the other side of the US.
One report (annual) listens to the name “National Defense Strategy, NDS), the other (4) is called” Global Military Posture) and will be issued by the US Department of Defense.
What exactly are they afraid of Brussels to refer to these reports? Give the signal of a reduction in US military presence by Europe, which would even blow up in the air even the goal of increasing the defense spending of NATO member states to 5% by 2035, along with their medium -term budgets (no Greece!).
As for the target of € 800 billion to increase the defense of EU member states by 2030, nor…Reason, has already been exceeded by 5% of NATO and now in Brussels is being sought life by the new Community budget of 2028 – 2034.
It is characteristic of what the EU Think Tank report says: UESS: «European allies have asked for US plans, especially for the revision of the attitude, as it would affect the magnitude of (expected) cuts to US forces and weapons in European theater. However, those who form these plans were reluctant to share details of the drawings of the drawings. This is a strong divergence from the Biden government’s approach – which, for example, has overturned plans to withdraw 12,000 troops from Germany to revise its stance after conversations with Berlin. While US representatives and NATO Secretary -General insist that the documents will contain no “surprise”, the absence of substantial transatlantic coordination indicates the opposite».
And not only that, but according to UESS, «Leaks of the provisional strategic driver of national defense, a brief document that guides politics during the first months of the government, provide some indications of what to expect. The United States should prioritize prevent a Chinese invasion of Taiwan and, therefore, their presence in the Indo-Pacific. To do this, the US will “take a risk” in Europe and the Middle East – that is, they will leave insufficient number of forces in these business theaters and rely on allied contributions..
Obviously, the text is largely inspired by its (American) project defense chapter 2025, which argues that the planning of conventional forces for the treatment of China must precede the allocation of resources in other missions, such as the fight against another conflict. The Armed Forces should also focus on the defense of the American homeland, not only from missile attacks but also of illegal border crossing and drug trafficking – and work closely with the Ministry of Interior. This focus shift will imply a massive shift of weight to allies to business theaters considered secondary by Washington. “
After all, it is emphasized that ‘Other indications come from defensive credits to the 2025 reconciliation law – the so -called “big beautiful bill”. The bill adds US $ 150 billion to the Ministry of Defense’s budget for specific activities that reflect the government’s key priorities. The biggest categories of expenditure are the shipbuilding industry-implying the preparation for a Nautical War in the Indo-Pacific-and the Golden Dome mission defense system, followed by ammunition, capabilities of unmanned aircraft and artificial intelligence, nuclear and nuclear. Finally, the legislation finances the development of the possibilities for the Indo-Pacific Management (Indopacom), but does not provide such provisions for other business theaters ».
“The possible direction of US defense priorities will have a significant impact on Europe,” the UESS notes.
And he adds that “There are still questions about the scale and speed of any significant changes arising from the revision of the attitude: the Ministry of Defense could begin by identifying opportunities in Europe today and would be more useful at the Indo-Pacific Theater or North America, without others. Or he could choose broader rearrangements that would affect NATO’s current deterrent attitude. A sudden decline in forces could affect the implementation of NATO’s new skill objectives to which the alliance has just agreed.
The impacts are also important to the defense industry. NDS could direct the defense industry to prioritize the production of resources suitable for a naval war in Asia, even if it means delaying traditions to European allies. This could also affect the arrays and Patriots that Trump promised to cover in European countries that carry their own air defense media to Ukraine. These congestion points can only be obvious when it is too late to react effectively.
The sudden decline in forces could affect the implementation of NATO’s new skill goals. “
SOS by EU experts
UESS ends in the following clear warning: ‘Europeans should take into account these factors in their current design. For example, while they should provide available air defense for Ukraine, after the recent agreement, they should also take measures to differentiate replacements – not only with Patriot but also with European alternatives. They should also prepare additional contributions to the alliance’s management structure and the predetermined brigades to offset US staff reductions.
While Trump seems more open to Ukraine’s support, the Washington wing in Washington remains strong – and will probably affect the government’s basic strategic revisions. Europeans should have a clear picture of the possible outcome of this process and its impact. If not, they may only feel the impact when it is too late».