Germany is to vote for a historical increase in defense costs

What is happening today, here in Berlin, will affect the whole future of Europe’s defense and its constant support for Ukraine.

The German Parliament, Bundestag, voted to remove the brakes from defense costs. This could make the way to massively increase military investment, just as Russia makes profits in Ukraine and Washington signals that Europe can no longer rely on US defense.

“This vote in Bundestag is absolutely decisive,” says Prof. Monica Schnicher, who chairs the German Council of Economic Experts.

“Following the Munich Security Conference, then Trump-Zelena Red, Europe was waking up. For the first time, Europeans may not be able to rely on Washington. Many people had sleepless nights after that.”

“Establishments for Europe’s defense costs depends on the development in Germany, as the owner of the largest defense budget in the region,” agrees Dr. Fenella McGerti, a senior associate of defense economy at the International Institute for Strategic Research based in London.

Defense costs in Germany increased by 23.2% last year, helping to achieve a record 11.7% increase in European defense spending.

“The remarkable initiatives announced in Germany are crucial for allowing more growth,” adds Dr. McGerti.

“Without them, any progress made to strengthen the military capacity of Germany may have stopped.”

Germany’s incoming new chancellor Friedrich Mertz is in a time race.

The new parliament is convened on March 25 and not everyone is in favor of all this money spent, especially for defense.

Like the AFD’s far right party, the left -wing linke swore to oppose it. Voting needs two-thirds in favor of passing, so Merz has a better chance of this happening today, under the existing (old) parliament. It must then be approved by the upper house of Germany.

In the meantime, Europe is still reconciling with the shock of messages coming from the Trump administration.

Last month, the Munich Security Conference I watched the delegates sitting open mouth and listening to the US Vice President of JD Vance Vice President, the bladder attack on Europe’s policies on migration and freedom of speech.

This was previously a few days earlier by the US Secretary of Defense Pete Heget, who tells NATO members that America’s 80-year defense umbrella for Europe should no longer be taken for granted.

Defense strategists in Europe are already planning the unthinkable: semi-Victorious Russia, which wins in Ukraine, then restores its army and threatens the Eastern NATO members, such as the Baltic countries, within three years or less.

This, at a time when the US commitment to Europe’s defense seems extremely trembling. President Trump has been summoned by some in his circle to remove US troops from Europe and even withdraw from NATO.

There is talk of France, which is expanding its national nuclear deterrent to cover other European nations.

In the meantime, most European governments are under pressure to increase defense costs after years of cuts.

The British army has now shrunk to its smallest size after the Napoleonic wars more than 200 years ago, and experts predict that it will exhaust ammunition within two weeks after the fight with a full-scale conventional war in Europe.

Germany has long been cautious of defense costs, not only for historical reasons dating back to 1945, but also due to the global debt crisis since 2009.

Which brings us back to today’s decisive vote in the Bundestag. It’s not just about defense. It is a part of the release of EUR 500 billion (£ 420 billion) for German infrastructure – fixing things like bridges and roads, but also for the payment of climate change measures, something that the Green Party insists on.

The other part is to eliminate the constitution restrictions on borrowing, which, in theory, could release unlimited billions of euros for defense spending, both for the German armed forces and for the pan -European defense fund. On March 4, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced plans for a defense fund of 800 billion euros, called the Reerm Europe Fund.

The proposal, which is voted in Berlin, is that any defense costs that amount to more than 1% of Germany’s GDP (national wealth) will no longer be subject to borrowing restrictions. So far, this debt ceiling has been fixed at 0.35 pcs. GDP.

Other countries will closely monitor to see if this proposal is passing. If this does not happen, then the European EU Commission’s project of the EU Commission may begin to a shocked start.

The challenge today for Europe’s security is great. If the United States is no longer back or the least can not be relied on to come to Europe’s defense, then what does the continent have to do to fill the gap?

Let’s start with the numbers. According to the Kiel Institute, which thoroughly traces these things, Europe spends only 0.1% of its wealth to support Ukraine’s protection while the United States spends 0.15%.

“It means,” says Giuseppe Irto of the Kiel Institute, “that if Europe has to compensate for the shortage, then it must double its contribution to 0.21%.”

But regardless of what is happening today in Berlin, it’s not just about money.

Many of the most sought after weapons in the weapons part of Ukraine have come from the United States, such as patriots for air defense and long-range artillery systems like Himari. The KIEL Institute puts the ratio of Ukraine’s rocket artillery to 86%, coming from the United States, with 82% of its brainchilding ammunition has also been delivered to the United States.

Then there is a whole issue of US intelligence for Kiev, much of it is obtained from satellites and geospatial images. If Washington would permanently exclude this, then the Ukrainian forces would risk partially blinded.

If America’s nuclear arsenal is removed from the equation, then there is a huge discrepancy between the 5,000 plus combat heads in Russia and the combined common Britain and France, which are less than a tenth of it. But it still leaves enough theoretically to act as a nuclear deterrent.

As for the “conventional”, ie. Not nuclear weapons, Western defense chiefs like to say that NATO combined forces are better than Russia’s.

Maybe, but if there is a bright lesson to get out of the war in Ukraine, it is that the “mass” matters. The Russian army may be of poor quality, but President Putin managed to throw such a huge number of men, drones, shells and rockets along the front lines of Ukraine that the Russians are relentlessly progressing, albeit slowly and at a huge price.

This should not be a surprise. Moscow put its economy at war some time ago. He appointed an economist as his Minister of Defense and rethought many of his factories to erupt huge amounts of ammunition, especially drones with explosive peaks.

While many European nations have dragged their feet because of increased defense, which are in cost, much above NATO’s mandate 2% of GDP, Russia is closer to 7%. About 40% of Russia’s national budget is spent on defense.

So Europe has quite a bit of catching up if it has to even approach its protection and security.

“If the vote goes away, then it will be important to Germany and Europe,” says Ed Arnold, a senior research associate in European security at the Menti -Institute of Royal United Services.

“This will determine the precedent and allow others to follow … However, three years since the invasion of Ukraine is the case with Germany is a reminder that more defense money is needed, but not enough.

“Europe needs defense and security leaders who are able to navigate the worsening security environment of the Euro-Atlantic blades. Cultural, not financial reform, would be the most valuable for Europe at the moment.”