Germany is scheduled to vote on the historical increase in defensive spending

What is happening today, here in Berlin, will affect the future of the entire European defense and its continuous support for Ukraine.

The German parliament, Bondstag, votes whether it will get rid of defensive spending. This can pave the way for a huge lifting of military investment just as Russia has achieved gains in Ukraine and Washington indicating that Europe is no longer able to rely on American protection.

“This vote in Bundestag is very important,” says Professor Monica Schenezer, who heads the Council of Economists in Germany.

“After the Munich Security Conference, then Trump Zelinski received Europe an invitation to wake up. For the first time, Europeans may not be able to rely on Washington. Many people had two nights without sleep after that.”

Dr. Viniela Makriti, an older colleague in the defense economics at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, agrees: “The view of the European defense spending depends on developments in Germany, as a holder of the largest defense budget in the region.”

Defense spending in Germany increased by 23.2 % last year, helped to raise a standard 11.7 % in European defense expenditures.

“The wonderful initiatives announced in Germany are the key to enabling more growth,” says Dr. Makriti.

“Without them, any progress has stopped enhancing the military capacity of Germany.”

The new Germany adviser, Fredchich Mirz, is in a race against time.

The new parliament is held on March 25, and not everyone supports all these money that is spent, especially on the defense.

Each right -wing AFD has pledged to the far left of the left. Voting needs two -thirds in favor of going, so MERZ has a better opportunity for this occurrence today, under the current (old) parliament. Then it must be approved by the Senate in Germany.

Meanwhile, Europe is still dealing with the shock of advertisements coming from the Trump administration.

At the Munich Security Conference in Munich last month, I watched while delegates were sitting open to listen to US Vice President JD Vance on Europe’s policies about immigration and freedom of expression.

This was previously before the US Defense Secretary, Beit Higseth, to NATO members, that the 80 -year -old defensive umbrella for Europe is no longer a Muslim.

The defense strategy in Europe is already planning for the unimaginable sake: it is a semi -designated Russia that achieves gains in Ukraine, then rebuilding its army and threatening the eastern members of NATO, such as the Baltic countries, within three years or less.

This, while the American commitment to defense in Europe seems very fragile. President Trump is urged by some in his circle to withdraw American forces from Europe to completely withdrawal from NATO.

There is an talk about France that extends its national nuclear deterrent to cover other European countries.

Meanwhile, most European governments are under pressure to raise defense spending after years of cuts.

The British army has now shrunk to the smallest in size since Napoleon’s wars, more than 200 years ago, experts expect ammunition within two weeks of a large -scale traditional war in Europe.

Germany has always been cautious about defensive spending, not only for historical reasons dating back to 1945, but also due to the 2009 global debt crisis.

This brings us back to the decisive day vote in Bundestag. It is not only the defense. One part revolves around the liberation of 500 billion euros (420 billion pounds) for German infrastructure – reforming things like bridges and roads, but also to pay climate change measures, which is insisted on the Greens Party.

The other part revolves around removing the restrictions imposed on the constitution of borrowing that, in theory, can liberate unlimited billions of euros for defensive spending, whether for the armed forces in Germany or the European Defense Fund. On March 4, European Commission President Ursula von der Layen announced plans for a 800 billion euro defense fund called the Europe Re -generating Fund.

The proposal voted in Berlin is that any defense spending amounts to more than 1 % of GDP in Germany (national wealth) will not be subject to borrowing. So far this debt ceiling has been fixed at 0.35 PCT of GDP.

Other countries will closely monitor to see if this proposal passes. If this does not happen, the European Union Committee of the European Union may be a start for a fragile start.

The challenge today for Europe’s security is a blatant challenge. If the United States no longer has its back, or at least unreliable to come to the defense of Europe, what should the continent do to fill the gap?

Let’s start with the numbers. According to the KIEL Institute, which follows these things accurately, Europe spends only 0.1 % of its wealth to help defend Ukraine, while the United States spends 0.15 %.

This means, says Giusepepe IRTO from the KIEL Institute, “said,” If Europe compensates for the deficiency, it needs to double its contribution to 0.21 %. “

But regardless of what is happening today in Berlin, this is not only about money.

Many of the most popular weapons in the columns of Ukraine came from the United States, such as National Air Defense and long -term artillery systems such as Himars. The KIEL Institute places 86 % missile artillery artillery rate, with 82 % of the ammunition also.

Then there is a complete question about the intelligence aid to us Kyiv, many of which are derived from satellites and spatial geographical images. If Washington will transfer it permanently, the Ukrainian forces are partially risked blind.

If America’s nuclear arsenal is removed from the equation, there is a tremendous contrast between the warheads that exceed 5,000 Russia and the common total of Britain and France weapons that reach less than ten. But this still leaves theoretically enough to serve as a nuclear deterrent.

When it comes to “traditional”, that is. Nuclear weapons, Western defense heads are fond of saying that NATO forces combined are superior to Russia.

Perhaps, but if there is one blatant lesson that comes out of the Ukraine war, this is important. Russia’s army may have poor quality, but President Putin managed to throw large numbers of men, drones, shells and missiles on the front lines of Ukraine, where the Russians advance unbearable, albeit slowly and at a great cost.

This should not be a surprise. Moscow has put its economy equally ago. She appointed an economist as defense minister and re -renewed many of its factories to calm huge amounts of ammunition, especially explosive drones.

While many European countries have been feet due to raising defense spending much higher than 2 % of GDP, Russia is closer to 7 %. About 40 % of Russia’s national budget is spent on defense.

So Europe has a little cake if that is so until it approaches its defense and security.

“If voting passes, it will be important for Germany and Europe,” says Ed Arnold, a large European security research colleague at the Royal United Institute of Services.

“It will put a precedent and allow others to follow … However, three years after the invasion of Ukraine, the issue of Germany is a reminder that more money for defense is necessary but not enough.

“Europe needs defense and security leaders who are able to move in a security environment in the rapidly deteriorating Atlantic Ocean. Cultural, instead of financial reform, will be more valuable for Europe at the present time.”