FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
Illusions of strong leadership axes, such as the Franco-German one, have faded. In their place, a flexible model of cooperation is emerging, where states engage according to common interests and objectives...
The Munich Security Conference and the meetings in Brussels showed that relations between Europe and the United States are entering a new phase. According to Ambassador and former Secretary General of the Italian Foreign Ministry Giampiero Massolo, Europe remains dependent on the US for security, but is considering more seriously the possibility of greater autonomy in defense and security.
In an interview with HuffPost, Massolo said the American message in Munich was clear. After the harsh tones of a year ago, Washington's representatives reiterated, in a more diplomatic way, that the current administration views with skepticism the values that Europe considers the foundation of the Western project. Essentially, the US is seeking a review of the common ideological basis that has supported the transatlantic alliance. If this is not achieved through understanding, Washington will pursue its own priorities.
The European response, according to Massolo, was balanced. Leaders such as Friedrich Merz, Emmanuel Macron, Keir Starmer and Kaja Kallas reaffirmed that European constitutional systems do not allow for deviations from the fundamental principles on which the continent's democracies are built. At the same time, they avoided ideological escalation, aware that an open clash with the US would further weaken Western unity and deepen divisions within the European Union itself.
From these developments emerges what Massolo calls “the Europe of the possible”. This is a Europe that recognizes its limits: complex decision-making processes, continued dependence on the US for defense, the lack of fully consolidated instruments and the reluctance to take autonomous positions towards actors like China. Illusions of strong leadership axes, such as the Franco-German one, have faded. In their place, a flexible model of cooperation is emerging, where states engage according to common interests and objectives.
This model approaches the concept of a Europe with “variable geometry”. In the field of defence and security, this means that willing countries can move forward on joint initiatives, while others can join later. Massolo links this approach to the model of “the willing” in support of Ukraine and to the idea of strengthening the European pillar within NATO. He stresses that there is no credible alternative to NATO; consequently, any attempt at autonomy must be developed within this framework.
The debate on a European dimension of nuclear deterrence is a new step in this direction. French President Emmanuel Macron has proposed discussions on expanding the role of the French nuclear force in a European context, while British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has signaled a willingness for dialogue. Massolo considers this moment opportune, especially in a climate where American guarantees, including references to NATO's Article 5, are perceived as less indisputable than in the past.
However, he stresses the practical and political limits of this debate. The French nuclear force is not integrated into NATO, while the British one is. The key to the use of nuclear weapons remains a national competence, which makes any joint scheme sensitive to sovereignty. The first steps, he says, should focus on coordination in the event of existential threats to Europe, while preserving the principle of national control.
Regarding Ukraine, Massolo notes that the US sees itself as a mediator between Moscow and Kiev and perceives the Europeans as biased in favor of Ukraine. This approach gives Europe political weight as Kiev’s main supporter, but at the same time places it outside the center of the negotiations. According to him, the outcome of the war and the security architecture that follows it will determine the future direction of the European defense debate.
In this context, the Italian position, described by Minister Guido Crosetto as realistic and cautious, rests on two pillars: keeping the US engaged in Europe and gradually strengthening European autonomy. Massolo estimates that, for the foreseeable future, Europe cannot offer a credible deterrent to Russia without American support. But he warns that if American distancing deepens, European countries will face more difficult decisions.
Massolo's analysis presents a more pragmatic Europe, more aware of its limits and the need to act. It does not aim to replace the US, but to reduce its dependence on it. According to him, recent signals from Brussels and Munich show that the continent has begun to take this responsibility seriously. The time for full decisions may not yet have come, but the preparation for them has begun.
Lini një Përgjigje