posted 27th April 2026
Once upon a time, Europe felt like one of the safest places in the world to live. Not so much these days. America is at best indifferent to Ukraine’s struggle for its independence, at worst actively supports Russia. Many commentators believe that once Russia is finished with Ukraine, it will launch attacks on other countries in Eastern Europe. Previously, NATO - an alliance of western European states, the USA and Canada, which is pledged to come together to defend any member state which is attacked - would have deterred Russia. Recently, though, President Trump, angered that NATO states have not helped him with his war in Iran (there is no reason why they should have - NATO is a defensive alliance, and the USA was not being attacked by Iran) has hinted that he would not come to Europe’s aid in the event of a Russian attack.
Europe is on its own, in a dangerous world. Isn’t it time for the armies of all the countries of Europe to combine to make a bigger, stronger army, to keep us all safe?
For
Europe has more than double the population of the USA, and is also one of the most prosperous parts of the world. Acting as a combined force, we could easily deter aggression from Russia or any other potential enemies.
Creating an army will not cause a war; it will make it less likely, as no country would want to take on such a vast force. As the ancient saying goes, ‘If you want peace, prepare for war.’ Moreover, being part of one army would make it much less likely that European countries would ever go to war with each other.
Europe may be a continent of many languages, but we share a common heritage of democracy. It makes sense for us to act together and to support each other. As Europe is one landmass, it would be easy on a practical basis for armed forces to work together. Multinational alliances can be very effective; Europe itself was liberated from Nazi rule in 1944-45 by an alliance of British, American and Commonwealth troops.
Against
Who would lead the European army? The Allied invasion of Europe in 1944 worked because it was essentially led by the Americans, with British and Commonwealth troops following on behind. There is no clear ‘top nation’ in Europe to take the big strategic decisions. Convening endless committee meetings in Brussels might just about work as a way of determining safety regulations for vacuum cleaners or the minimum cocoa content of chocolate, but it is no way to issue orders to the battlefield.
Europe is a collection of democracies. What if some member states want to go to war and others do not? Should people’s democratically expressed wishes be ignored?
Soldiers in Ukraine are willing to risk their lives because they are defending their own people and their own country. It would be much harder to generate the same sense of loyalty to a large continent. Why should British soldiers die for Albania (or vice versa)?
The sheer logistics of organising soldiers across nearly 50 countries, speaking 24 different languages, are impractical, particularly in the middle of a conflict. European armies can still form ad hoc alliances as necessary, without having to be structured as one army.
Motion that goes with this topic
This house would create a European army.
