Germany intends 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, votes for whether to remove the defense brakes. This can pave the way to a large -scale rise in military investments if Russia will make a profit in Ukraine and Washington that Europe can no longer rely on the US protection.

“This voting in the Bundestag is absolutely important,” says Professor Monica Schniac, who heads Germany the Council of Economic Experts.

“After the Munich Security Conference, Europe called in the Trump-Zelensk line.

“The forecast of European defense costs ends on developing in Germany as the owner of the largest defense budget of the region,” Dr. Fennel McGert, a senior defense employee at the London International Strategic Studies Institute, agrees.

Last year, defense costs in Germany increased by 23.2%, helping to increase the record by 11.7% in European defense costs.

“Great initiatives announced in Germany are key to ensuring further growth,” adds D -McGert.

“Without them, any progress made in the strengthening of German military abilities can stop.”

New German Chancellor Friedrich Merz is in the race against time.

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

Both the far -right party AFD, and the far left, promised to resist this. Voting requires two -thirds in favor, so the dead is more likely to happen today, under the existing (old) parliament. Then it should be approved in the upper house of Germany.

Meanwhile, Europe still renounces the shock of ads coming from the Trump administration.

Last month, at the Munich Security Conference, I watched as delegates sitting with open mouths, listening to US Vice President JD Vance, a brilliant attack on Europe’s policy on migration and freedom of speech.

This was preceded by a few days earlier by US Secretary of Defense, Pitt Hugset, who told NATO members that the 80-year-old defensive umbrella in America should no longer be given for granted.

Defense strategists in Europe are already planning incredible: a full -fledged Russia that will profit in Ukraine, then rebuilding its army and threatening NATO East member, for example, in the Baltic states for three years or less.

This is, at a time when the US commitment to the defense of Europe looks extremely shaky. Some of the President Trump calls to pull us out of Europe and even leave NATO.

There is a talk about expanding its national nuclear deterrence to cover other European countries.

Meanwhile, most European governments are pressured to collect protection costs after many years.

Now the British army has decreased to the smallest size after the Napoleonic wars more than 200 years ago, and experts predict that ammunition will end within two weeks after fighting the full -scale war in Europe.

Germany has long been cautious about the cost of defense not only for historical reasons, which begin in 1945, but also with the 2009 debt crisis.

What returns us to today’s most important vote in the Bundestag. It is not just about protection. One part is the release of € 500 billion (£ 420 billion) for German infrastructure – fixing things such as bridges and roads, as well as pay for climate change, which was insisted by the green party.

The second part is to remove restrictions on the borrowing constitution, which, theoretically, can release unlimited billions of euros for defense costs, both for the German armed forces and for the common European Defense Fund. On March 4, the President of the European Commission Ursul von der Leyen announced plans to protect the fund of 800 billion euros called the Rare Europe Foundation.

The proposal that voted in Berlin is that any defense costs that make up more than 1% of Germany (national wealth) are no longer subject to borrowing. So far, this debt ceiling has been fixed at 0.35 PCT from GDP.

Other countries will keep a close eye on whether this proposal will pass. If this does not happen, then the EU Commission Project may begin before the shaky start.

The task for Europe’s security today is great. If the US is no longer back, or at least one cannot rely on the protection of Europe, then what should the continent be done to fill the space?

Let’s start with the numbers. According to the Kiel Institute, which carefully monitors these things, Europe spends only 0.1% of its wealth, helping to defend Ukraine and the US spend 0.15%.

“This means that,” says Giuseppe Institute of Kiel, “that if Europe has to draw up, he needs to double his contribution to 0.21%.”

But no matter what happens today in Berlin, it is not just about money.

Many of the most sought after weapons in Ukraine’s weapons came from the United States, such as air defense and artillery systems such as Himars. The Kiel Institute supplies a share of Ukraine’s 86% missile artillery, with 82% of the US howitzer.

Then the whole question arises about the US intelligence for Kyiv, most of it is obtained from satellites and geopastrous images. If Washington would be constantly disconnected, then the Ukrainian forces risk partially blinded.

If the nuclear arsenal in America is taken out of the equation, then between 5,000 Russian fighting cities and the total number of Britain and France, which make up less than a tenth of this. But it is still theoretically leaving enough to act as nuclear deterrence.

When it comes to “ordinary”, that is. Non -nuclear weapons, Western defense chiefs like to say that NATO united forces are superior to Russia.

Maybe, but if there is one vivid lesson that will leave the war of Ukraine, this “mass” matters. The Russian army may be of poor quality, but President Putin was able to throw such a huge number of men, drones, shells and missiles to the front -line of Ukraine, which the Russians are relentlessly advanced, albeit slowly and at a huge price.

This should not be a surprise. Moscow put its economy on a military basis some time ago. He appointed the economist with his minister of defense and rethinking many of his factories to knock out a huge amount of ammunition, especially unusual.

While many European countries have pulling their legs, increasing protection costs much higher than 2% GDP, Russia is closer to 7%. About 40% of Russia’s national budget is spent on defense.

Thus, in Europe there is a little catch up when it even approached to attract its protection and safety.

“If the vote is going through, it will be essential for Germany and Europe,” says Ed Arnold, a senior scientist on European security security at the Royal Service Institute.

“This will set a precedent and allow others to follow … However, three years from the invasion of Ukraine, the case of Germany reminds that more money for protection is needed, but not enough.

“Europe needs defense and security leaders who are able to move with the rapidly deteriorating Euro -Atlantic security environment. Cultural and not financial reform will be the most valuable for Europe.”