In efforts to protect the UK and EU, the best must not become the enemy of the good
St. Peter's Basilica, Vatican, 26 April 2025: Donald Trump talks with Volodymyr Zelensky before the funeral of Pope Francis | Image by: Ukraine Presidents Office / Alamy Stock Photo
3 min read
While speculation about the possibility of some form of ceasefire agreement between Russia and Ukraine has intensified since Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky’s extraordinary meeting in St Peter’s Basilica, the threat from an expansionist Russia will remain
Responding to that threat must be the top and bottom line in the renegotiation of the 2021 Trade and Cooperation Agreement, spearheaded by a proposed EU-UK defence pact. As the Prime Minister meets EU leaders ahead of the summit on 19 May, the highest priority of strengthening European collective security must be kept front and centre in their minds.
Issues relating to trade in food and agricultural products, energy co-operation and youth mobility are extremely important, but they are deeply political and potentially divisive within both the UK and the EU. However, they must be seen in the broader context of European security.
It is therefore encouraging that some flexibility is on the table regarding fishing quotas. A two-year extension to the current arrangements would seem to have defused this issue and reassured French concerns, although some are still pushing for a five-year extension. It would have been absurd if vital defence collaboration had been put in jeopardy by the issue of fish – potentially a classic case of the tail wagging the dog.
More positively, the ambition of any EU-UK defence pact should be to open a path whereby, without delay, UK defence companies could qualify for access to the proposed €150bn fund to make weapons purchases under the EU’s Security Action for Europe. This would not be a special case issue for the EU, as Brussels already has bilateral security deals with about half a dozen other non-EU member states.
Those fearful of Whitehall undermining the 2016 Brexit referendum result should therefore not see the defence pact as a cover for closer social and economic ties to Brussels. The defence issues must be judged on their own merits against the backdrop of the current strategic situation in Europe. And, of course, it is to be welcomed that British defence companies and jobs will benefit from access to the EU fund, also making a wider contribution to that elusive economic growth.
While it is recognised that the US will step down in Nato, it must not be allowed to step out
While these positive benefits of an EU-UK defence pact are certainly encouraging, they should not be allowed to become another Trojan horse facilitating the idea of a European defence force, as promoted by some of our close neighbours. Even though Donald Trump has made it clear that the US wishes to play a reduced role in European security, this should not be taken as a green light towards some kind of new European defence structure. Such a structure already exists, and it is Nato. Even though the US may play a reduced role in the 76-year-old organisation, it has practices, procedures and capabilities that have stood the test of time.
The challenge for European members of Nato is to work out, in a collaborative way, how some of the enabling capabilities currently provided by the US can be replicated by European armed forces and defence industries. This is a matter of urgency to ensure Europe steps up in a choreographed way as the US steps down.
However, part of the challenge to European leaders is to ensure that while it is recognised that the US will step down in Nato, it must not be allowed to step out. In this regard, the efforts by Keir Starmer to walk the tightrope between the US and Europe are to be applauded.
General the Lord Dannatt is a Crossbench peer and former chief of the general staff
