Europe's Arms Dependence Meets Brussels' Budget Stalemate

Germany’s defense ministry warned that moving too quickly to reduce reliance on U.S. weapons could jeopardize relations with Washington. The warning lays bare how military procurement ties European governments to an arms market they say they want to escape.

Dependence by design

Germany gets more than a third of its major arms imports from the United States. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute said U.S. suppliers accounted for 37% of those imports between 2021 and 2025, including F-35 fighter jets, CH-47 Chinook transport helicopters and Patriot air defense systems. Across European NATO members, U.S. manufacturers supplied 58% of major arms imports during that period.

Internal briefing notes prepared ahead of a Wednesday meeting of the German parliament’s defense committee described Washington’s response to calls for more autonomy: “a publicly expressed German desire for autonomy in arms projects is therefore viewed critically by the United States. Germany cannot afford abrupt changes of course without jeopardizing the partnership.”

The European Commission wants EU countries to spend at least half of their defense procurement budgets on European-made equipment by 2030. The current figure is about 15%. But the ministry’s notes say Washington wants European countries to take more responsibility for defense while keeping American companies in contention for European contracts. In February, the Trump administration threatened retaliatory measures if EU procurement rules restricted U.S. manufacturers’ access to the European market.

The war in Iran has disrupted U.S. arms deliveries to European countries, while shortages of U.S. Patriot missiles have complicated efforts to help Ukraine defend itself against Russian attacks. European countries finance American weapons deliveries to Ukraine through a NATO-coordinated purchasing scheme. In October, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy accused the Pentagon of delaying missiles that allies had already paid for. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio denied that Washington was deliberately withholding military support.

An American defense industry source familiar with the issue argued that Europe should stick with U.S. suppliers. “Buying U.S. has a time advantage, a performance advantage, an economic advantage,” the source said. “This is worth a little bit of uncertainty when it comes to political leadership in Washington.” The ministry said other strategic partnerships, including with Canada, “can therefore only take place in parallel” with existing cooperation with Washington.

Defense Minister Boris Pistorius and his American counterpart Pete Hegseth signed a declaration of intent in September to deepen industrial cooperation, including joint production. The ministry said Washington had also offered cooperating allies the prospect of preferential treatment in U.S. government-to-government weapons sales. How that would work, and which countries might benefit, remained unclear.

Arms, sanctions and the limits of mediation

Estonian Prime Minister Kristen Michal urged Europe not to open a diplomatic channel to Russian President Vladimir Putin. “Europe should not be in a mediator’s position,” he told POLITICO. “You should not take the role of trying to please the dictator.” Estonia, with a population of 1.3 million, borders Russia and has faced what the report described as persistent Moscow attempts to stoke internal unrest.

Michal called for continued sanctions and said Europe shouldn’t weaken its position through mediation. “For once, Europe has a plan which is actually working” by suffocating Russia economically with sanctions, he said. He added: “You cannot [have] two roles. One role is backing up Ukraine and pressuring Russia. A second one is trying to have a form of mediation.”

Finnish President Alexander Stubb and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre held a 90-minute call with Putin in late October. U.S. officials were due to meet Ukrainian and Russian representatives the following week in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, in the first face-to-face negotiations since February, according to U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff. Michal said Europeans “appreciate” the Trump administration’s efforts to broker a peace deal, but “the pressure should be very much on Russia.”

Estonia has worked with Poland and Sweden to seek tougher visa rules for Russians, including former fighters who fought in Ukraine. Tallinn proposed an outright ban on former soldiers from Russia’s armed forces entering the EU. Officials said they believe tourist visas give Russian operatives easy access to the bloc for alleged hybrid warfare, including drone flights over sensitive security sites and infrastructure sabotage. EU officials said the European Commission planned to put forward proposals in the new year.

Brussels’ plans without a settled bill

Negotiations over the EU’s 2028-2034 budget have stalled policy files on AI chips, the Arctic and agriculture. Policymakers said they couldn’t advance proposals without clarity on funding, with allocations after next year unknown. A person involved in budget talks said: “There’s an increase in sectoral legislation with objectives that require multiannual budgetary commitments. But the budget talks are disconnected from the policy discussions.”

The Commission’s Arctic strategy envisaged transport networks, critical raw materials projects and a maritime security hub, but gave no funding details. European Commissioner for international partnerships Jozef Síkela said it was “not possible” to commit to future funding while negotiations continued. The bloc’s chipmaking plan said it could not “pre-empt nor prejudge” the budget talks, and that project funds “can only be requested at a later stage.”

The uncertainty also reaches into environmental policy. The nature restoration law requires national governments to draft plans to restore ecosystems such as lakes, peatlands and forests. Several governments said they couldn’t comply without knowing the EU-level funding available. Dutch agriculture minister Jaimi Van Essen said: “We have money now in our national context, but we will be needing more when you look at the 2050 goals [for nature].” France’s deputy permanent representative Cyril Piquemal put the funding problem plainly: “We cannot adopt more rules without providing the means to put them into force.”

The Commission’s next budget proposal would give governments greater leeway to move funds among priorities. Commission officials said more than 90 percent of the current budget was ring-fenced at the start, leaving the bloc poorly equipped to respond to the Covid-19 pandemic, multiple energy crises and the war in Ukraine. Regional presidents and agriculture ministers, who together receive nearly half of total EU payouts, sought a larger share of secured funding. French Agriculture Minister Annie Genevard said the “ideal solution” would be to increase the ring-fenced €297 billion for farmers from 2028 to 2034. The Commission earmarked €217 billion for poorer regions over seven years, while national governments would have considerable discretion over funding for wealthier areas. EU governments were seeking agreement on the overall budget by the end of the year; the Brussels apparatus is still arguing over what it can pay for.