بودجه بیشتر نظامی برای چه؟ جدل نمایندگان اروپا در برنامه رینگ

euronews (بزبان فارسی)

بودجه بیشتر نظامی برای چه؟ جدل نمایندگان اروپا در برنامه رینگ  آیا افزایش هزینه‌های دفاعی در اروپا سرمایه‌گذاری راهبردی است یا تلاشی برای راضی کردن دونالد ترامپ؟ این موضوع این هفته در برنامه «رینگ» با حضور دو نماینده پارلمان اروپا، مارک بوتنگا و لوکاس ماندل، بررسی می‌شود.  لب بیشتر : http://parsi.euronews.com/2026/05/22/bodgh-bishtr-nthami-brai-chh-gdl-nmaindgan-aropa-dr-brnamh-ring  مشترک شوید: یورونیوز به یازده زبان دیگر در دسترس شماست

Transcript

00:08Hello and welcome to The Ring, Euronews' weekly debate show broadcasting from the European

00:14Parliament in Strasbourg. Today, I'm Stefan Grobe. On The Ring, members of the European

00:19Parliament go face-to-face on some of the biggest issues facing Europe. Today, we're

00:25going to talk about European defence efforts in a fast-changing geopolitical environment.

00:31Luis Alberto has more. Wars in Ukraine and Iran, economic insecurity

00:37and questions about the future of NATO. Europe finds itself at a moment of profound uncertainty.

00:45That sense of vulnerability has triggered a historic shift in European defence policy.

00:49Countries that for decades reduced military budgets are now dramatically increasing defence

00:54spending. Europe is also trying to redefine its alliance. And many European leaders argue

01:00that Europe must become more strategically autonomous. At the same time, Europe fears being sidelined

01:06if the world increasingly becomes shaped by deals between the United States, China and Russia.

01:12Can Europe successfully navigate this turbulent period? Can it emerge as truly independent

01:17global power? A lot to unpack here for our contenders. And here they are.

01:27Lukas Mandl, an Austrian MEP from the Central-Right European People's Party. He's a member of the

01:33Committees on Development, Legal Affairs and Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs at the European

01:38Parliament. Regarding the EU's priorities at a time of growing global uncertainty and geopolitical turmoil,

01:43he said, it's the economy, stupid. Let's put first things first.

01:49Mark Potenga, a Belgian MEP from the Left Group. He's a member of the Committees on Foreign Affairs and Security

01:55and Defence at the European Parliament. He has criticised the EU's position on the global stage,

01:59arguing that the double standards of this Europe are not only a disgrace, they also allow the creation of a

02:05world

02:05of chaos and war. So be ashamed, because today, this Europe is not a force for good, but an accomplice

02:11to crime.

02:15So let me welcome to the Ring, Lukas Mandl and Mark Potenga.

02:19Good to see you. Great to have you here.

02:22The aim of the Ring is to offer our viewers a glimpse at European Parliament debates, so you should feel

02:29right at home.

02:30Are you ready? You're ready. Thanks for having me. Good. I want to start with something provocative,

02:37Mark Potenga. Will more money, more defence money actually make Europe safer or are governments confusing

02:44spending with strategy? Oh, I think definitely we don't have a strategy right now. So I think that's

02:50very impressive. Like we put in a lot of money, right? Hundreds and hundreds of billions going to the

02:54defence sector, very often with little conditions, first of all. So we also see that at the same time you

02:59have

02:59these multinational companies that are now sending a lot more money to their shareholders. But I'm like,

03:04are we just sponsoring basically not just their profits, but even their dividends, their share buybacks?

03:09So that is one question. But secondly, what are our priorities? We see that people are buying,

03:15you know, armoured vehicles to be used in the west of Africa. We're seeing the F-35 fighter jets being

03:21bought by member states. And I'm like, what is this for? This is not for our defence. This is, if

03:27we,

03:27with all of the money and all the material we have, you know, which is much more than what Russia

03:31has,

03:31you know, we have many times more tanks, many times more fighter jets, many times more battleships than

03:36Russia has. We see Russia struggling, you know, they were unable to even organise the parade in Moscow.

03:42Why are we not able to defend ourselves with the money we're already spending?

03:45Yeah, let me take that question right to Lukas Mandel. Defence strategy or not?

03:50Oh, it's like everybody needs an insurance. If you're driving a car or doing whatever, you need

03:55insurance and spending money for defence is an insurance for our security in the first place. And

04:01secondly, it's also for the very cause of Europe's prosperity, because the more we can innovate and

04:07produce on European soil, the better for jobs, for growth and for Europe's economic future.

04:13On this point, connecting Europe stronger, I mean, it's not like Europe doesn't have

04:19armies, it doesn't have had armies or defence spending before. Isn't the problem really

04:25inefficiency and fragmentation in Europe when we talk about military?

04:29Well, I remember the European Commission, the previous one, the one of Jean-Claude Juncker,

04:33you know, saying if we work together better at European level, we can save 100 billion,

04:38up to 100 billion euros on defence spending. I'm like, that's that's marvellous. Let's do that.

04:44Right. And now you see, no, we work together better, but we also need to spend hundreds of billions

04:49more while we're already outspending vast amount of countries in the world. Most countries in the

04:55world spend a lot less than European countries do. We need to really, really be aware of that.

05:00So there is no underfunding? Oh, there's absolutely no underfunding.

05:03There might be a very bad use of some of the funds. This is something else. We've seen it at

05:07European

05:07level as well. You know, until very recently drones were not a priority, not a top priority of the

05:12European defence spending. Then suddenly became everything. You know, drones were everything we

05:18needed, the Alpha, the Omega. And now we're again, yeah, maybe it's not drones that are the main priority.

05:23So this is what I was saying. There's no real strategy, but there is an idea of saying Europe, you

05:27know,

05:27should be a main player globally. This is not about defence. This is about Europe being able

05:33to project power in the rest of the world, you know, in Africa, in the Middle East, not defence,

05:38attack. Do you agree? We have big underfunding. We have had it for many decades in Europe.

05:46We have to invest in drones. I really, I really want to address these conspiracy theories that are

05:51there as if it would not be for our defence, but for a different cause. It's for our defence.

05:55Europe is the very entity on this planet that's planning military matters in the very field of

06:02defence, not in the field of attack. And drones are obviously what's really needed in today's

06:07warfare. And if we are well equipped in the field of drones, if we have innovation also in the drones

06:13field and also production on European soil for jobs and prosperity, then we have a smaller probability

06:19that we will be attacked because we will be more secure if we are able to defend ourselves. And this

06:25is

06:25the whole philosophy of defence. So our security is at stake. And I think conspiracy theories are

06:31rather harming our European unity and our European defence capability.

06:36First of all, I don't think the massive increase is justified. Let's say this first. Secondly, I think

06:41it actually will weaken Europe on the long term as well, because contrary to what you're saying,

06:45it is not a good idea for our industry. You know, we have you speak about jobs. Basically,

06:50the defence industry yields less jobs for money invested than other sectors do. You will not save

06:56the steel industry of militarisation, you know, producing 1000 tanks. It's about three days of

07:01production of a steel factory. So you can see that you're actually weakening. Also, there's a negative

07:06multiplier effect that might be applied to other to other industries. So you're weakening structurally the

07:12industrial base of Europe by saying we put more defence, but we will lose other sectors. Look at

07:16the automobile sector. And secondly, indeed, what is the threat that justifies, you know, this massive...

07:22Why, for example, if I hear the German Chancellor, right, saying, I want to have the biggest army in

07:28Europe. Why do you want the biggest army in Europe? Is that your threat assessment? That the problem is,

07:33you don't have the biggest army in Europe. We need to be very clear. There are threats, you know,

07:37and one of the threats is the arms race. One of the threats is nuclear war. Let's be very clear.

07:41This is very clear. How do you deal with that? During the Cold War, we knew disarmament,

07:49transparency, limitations on arms control systems, all of these things we knew during the Cold War,

07:54with the Soviet Union that was vastly more powerful and vastly more ideological than Putin or Putin's

08:00Russia will ever be. Okay. Do you hear this? In the Cold War, freedom won against dictatorship.

08:05And this was, of course, due to deterrence. And deterrence is what is needed. Deterrence will

08:11also save us. And deterrence is only possible if we can take care of ourselves. And the security

08:17sector and industries is not isolated from other sectors. We have to understand Europe. And I really

08:22care for Europe's prosperity, for jobs on our continent and for the future of the generations ahead.

08:28Europe became a continent of consumption. We have been consuming over decades innovation

08:32from America, production from China and other parts of Asia, also innovation from China in the

08:39meantime. So we need innovation on European soil. We also need production on European soil. And when

08:44you talk about the automotive sector, there are not many sectors as much connected to the security

08:49sector as this one. So security and economy has to be taken serious. That's why I'm also saying,

08:56let's put first things first. This must be the priority. But I guess the threat assessment is

09:02different in the Baltics and in Portugal, right? So I'm coming back to Putin here. Shall we take him

09:08seriously? Shall we fear him? Is this whole buildup a response to Russian assertiveness and aggression?

09:16I think we invoke the Russian aggression in Ukraine to justify programs that existed before. Let's not

09:22forget that, for example, the European defense fund was started before the current war in Ukraine.

09:27So there is, of course, you know, I mean, the defense fund was so important for

09:30for Europe to be started ahead of the Russian attack. But the quantity is so important. The

09:36connection is so important. When we see that, I mean, let me get back. First of all,

09:42with these things, we're putting a lot of money, extra money, you know, by saying Russia is going.

09:47There's this very there's a contradiction in European mainstream discourse, which is saying at the

09:52same time that Russia is extremely weak, is losing in Ukraine, and we might be able to free Ukraine

09:57from Russian occupation militarily. And then you have these these these images of the Red Square in

10:02Moscow where there's no parade. And on the other hand, the fact that Putin would be able to conquer

10:07the whole of Europe. You know, these are two things that are obviously incompatible right now at the

10:11same moment. But we don't want to find out. What we don't want to find out is right now what,

10:16for example, a desperate Russia would do, right? Could it be more desperate than it already is?

10:21Sorry? I mean, do you see any reliability or predictability in Putin's regime? There is

10:28already total desperation. So we have to be able to defend ourselves. I agree with the commission's

10:33president who has stated we have to keep our hand reached out to the other Russia. I'm absolutely

10:39aware of that, that after Putin's regime, we have to give Russia the chance to become

10:45a democratic rule of law. We need to have diplomacy right now. We need to do diplomacy right now. And

10:50this is the disaster, the disaster of this European Union. We have forgotten what diplomacy is. Talk to

10:57other people. And diplomacy doesn't mean going having a drink with a friend. Diplomacy is talking to the

11:03opponent, to the adversary, to the enemy. This is to de-escalate and to limit conflict. And most countries in

11:09the world have tried this and the European Union has refused. Now I see Angela Merkel, you know,

11:14who got the order of merits. I see Alexander Stobsting. We need to do that. Right. A lot of

11:18names floating around. We come back to this later, but I want to stop you here as we're just getting

11:23warmed up, as you can see.

11:29Now it's time for our viewers to get a real flavor of the European Parliament chamber, where members

11:34ask each other questions. And sometimes it can get heated. So let's get started. Lukas Madl,

11:41I'm going to ask you to ask the first question to Mark. Well, Mark Potenga, as a colleague in the

11:47European Parliament, how can we make sure that we establish more freedom for the Europeans to the

11:53inside and more strength to the outside? This is the overall issue of our time. I would say

11:57Europe needs more strength for its civilization, for its reliability, the diplomatic approach that you

12:03obviously do not see from the European side, while Europe is the strongest diplomatic power,

12:09given the geopolitical situation today. So how can we create more strength to the outside and how can we

12:14establish more freedom to the inside for our citizens? I think that's a very interesting question

12:18coming from the center-right, who's governing in many governments in Europe and who is basically

12:23limiting the right to protest, who's limiting the right to strike, who's limiting basically

12:29fundamental freedoms of Europeans. And so I would say, first thing, please tell the governments of

12:35your political group, of your political party to stop limiting the fundamental freedoms of Europeans.

12:41And secondly, towards the outside, I need, we need, I think, to rebuild European credibility.

12:48And how do we do that? We do that by stopping the double standards, by no longer saying international

12:53law is important for us in Ukraine, but in Palestine we don't care. International law is important when

13:00Russia or Putin violates it, but we don't care when Trump violates international law. Because if you have

13:05these double standards, never ever will other countries take you seriously. And never ever will you be a

13:12decent player on the international scale. Okay. On this, I think you want to follow up.

13:17I mean, there's so much to be said. I think it was now the fourth or fifth conspiracy theory from

13:23Mr. Potenga in today's talk about freedom being limited in Europe. There is no part on this planet,

13:29no continent, no country where freedom is so much established and so much defended and strong as it is

13:34in Europe. Obviously, also that we have this debate today, also that extremists have all democratic

13:42rights in parliaments in Europe, including the very European parliament. All of this is about freedom.

13:47And then mixing things up doesn't make it better. Of course, when international law is violated,

13:53Europe is the strongest voice speaking about that. Europe stood strong against Trump's attempt,

13:58for example, when it comes to Greenland. And we succeeded in that area. Europe stood strong when

14:03it was not clear whether the terrorists will go that way or the other way from Trump's side.

14:09He put us in a limbo again, but we didn't follow this pathway of a limbo. We didn't enter this

14:14political battlefield of Trump. We stood strong and we managed to succeed more when it comes to the

14:21geopolitical tensions given than other parts of the world. But of course, we need more strength to

14:26the outside, especially in that field you are doubting in the field of our own security and being able to

14:32take care of it. Marc Maggiac, you want to react? And then your question to Lucas Mandel.

14:36Well, I think it's interesting because very often the EPP and central parties, when they don't have

14:41an answer, they say this is a conspiracy theory. What we see in many countries, like in Germany now,

14:45there's a debate even on saying we can't use the watermelon anymore as a political symbol because it

14:50would be anti-Semitic. This is, you know, what we are seeing. We're seeing this also with action against

14:55trade unions in different countries. So we see that there's a democratic backsliding, which human rights

14:59organizations are pointing out in Europe. You know, it's not some kind of left conspiracy to say

15:04that. But you don't want to see it because it's your governments doing it. Secondly, what I indeed

15:09want to ask now, and I think that that's a thing. You say that Europe stands up for international law

15:17and you quote Greenland. Europe didn't stand up for international law in Greenland. It stood up for its own

15:23territorial integrity. That is something very different because when we had to stand up for international

15:29law, the illegal war on Iran, you supported it yourself. When it is about denouncing the illegal occupation of

15:36Lebanon by Israel, you support it. When the International Court of Justice says that we should sanction Israel as

15:42third parties, we have responsibility, you refuse it. So basically, when, you know, the Venezuelan president,

15:48whatever we think of him, is kidnapped illegally. And the world globally condemns this, saying this is

15:54just absolutely not how we deal with, how would I say, with international relations. And this is a violation

15:59of the UN Charter. You support it. So this is the issue. These double standards, it's not Europe that has

16:05double standards. You know, it is you. It is the governing coalition of Europe that has these double

16:09standards. Look, who is dealing with international law, who is in the lead of preserving it and observing it

16:17as the United Nations. We had yesterday night in the European Parliament's plenary debate on the

16:21United Nations necessary reform. United Nations have to be reformed for obvious reasons. And if you are

16:29telling now that the war on the Iranian regime was wrong, I say, yeah, it was amateurishly done by the

16:37United

16:37States while the decapitation of the Mueller regime's leaders worked very well. But the war obviously

16:45was wrong because it didn't work out well. The Mueller regime is still in place. I have been

16:49sanctioned myself by the Mueller regime since 2023. So I know what I'm talking about when I say women are

16:55suppressed in Iran. Iran is threatening the whole world, not only the region. And of course, to threaten

17:02our only partner country in the region, the only democracy, the only rule of law based state in the

17:07region, Israel, is part of the conspiracy theories of your political side. And this is a sign of freedom in

17:13Europe that you can speak freely about that, even if it's a very much in minority being opinion. But

17:22you're allowed to say that. And there's there's no many parts on Earth where you can do that. And

17:27last point on Greenland. I mean, when international law is violated, it doesn't matter whether it's

17:31Europe's interest or the arts interest. We care for international law. We even want to

17:34save international law during these geopolitical times of tensions. And that means that we have to

17:41reform the United Nations. OK, thank you for a great debate so far. We've heard your views.

17:47Now it's time to hear from a new voice.

17:54And for our quote of the week, I would like to bring in Italian Prime Minister Georgia Meloni

17:59in a letter addressed to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. She said this.

18:04We cannot justify to our citizens that the EU allows financial flexibility to be used for security

18:11and defense purposes in the strictest sense, but not to protect families, workers and enterprises from

18:18a new energy crisis that threatens to severely impact the real economy. Your take on this, Mark?

18:27Well, two things. First, she's walked back to her statement. Secondly, it's terribly hypocritical,

18:32because the fact that we now have again these horrible austerity rules was approved by her

18:38government. So first, this is fantastic. First, the far right approves this or the center right,

18:43whatever you want to call her, approves these rules. And then they say, it's not fair. So this is,

18:48you know, pure populism. But what is true is that Europe today says there's no money for your

18:55hospitals, for your pensions, for your schools. But miraculously, we find hundreds of billions

19:00for the defense multinationals. You know, this contradiction is real. And so indeed, we do not

19:05need these austerity rules anymore. And once again, they've been imposed by the mainstream parties,

19:10including Georgia Meloni's. Okay, Lucas Mandel, your reaction? Yeah, this is part of the extremist

19:15populist approach. I think also the consumers, viewers of this program should see that there is no

19:20contradiction between producing something on European soil instead from buying it from outside

19:26and having hospitals and schools and streets, because the one thing is connected with the other.

19:32If we have strong prosperity, if we have growth, finally, in Europe, again, we will also be able

19:37to afford the social welfare states. We have established generations before us have established

19:41in Europe, and we will have schools and roads. All right, we're going to continue the conversation,

19:45but now I'll have to take a break here on The Ring. We'll be back with more after this. Stay

19:51with us.

19:59Welcome back to The Ring, Euronews' weekly debate show. I'm Stefan Gorbe and I'm joined by Lucas Mandel

20:06from the European People's Party from Austria and Marc Bottenga from the Left Group from Belgium.

20:12At this point, let's take a look at the transatlantic partnership regarding defense. Trump wants to

20:18weaken the NATO alliance and seems increasingly noncommittal to common defense. But the military

20:23business is showing a different picture. So here are some numbers from the Stockholm International

20:29Peace Research Institute. According to that institute, 64% of European NATO weapons imports come

20:36from the United States. And European arms imports rose by more than 150% between 2020 and 24 compared to

20:45the previous period. U.S. arms exports to Europe increased by more than 200% in the same period. So

20:53Europe is now the world's largest arms important region. Lukas Mandel, hearing these numbers, your comments.

21:02I mean, we had a time of many good beginnings since the beginning of Putin-Russia's war. But spending is

21:08not everything. I've emphasized that before. It's about where to spend. It's about the connection

21:14between the armed forces of the member states and also the understanding of the various different

21:19threats. Now we see the situation that the United States are obviously willing to reduce their number

21:26of troops on European soil. I think that's not only a development due to the given current U.S.

21:33administration under Trump. It was generally something that had to be expected over decades.

21:38And a mature Europe will anyway be able to take care of itself. But I do not want to have

21:43confrontation in other parts of the world. I want cooperation, but on the basis of European strength.

21:47Okay. How can we be strategically independent by buying American weapons?

21:52Oh, we cannot. Let's be very clear. If you buy, for example, I mentioned the F-35 fighters as before.

21:58Making a little bit of a cartoon out of it, you could say that with one push of the button,

22:03Trump can deactivate them. So if it were to, I don't know, defend Greenland, they would be completely

22:07useless. We do need to think how you create this autonomy. This you can do in different ways.

22:14One of the ways I would suggest is to say we need to diversify partnerships. So this idea of we

22:20need

22:20to, we are locking ourselves up in this kind of submissive attitude towards Trump. We've seen

22:26it as well with the trade deal at the EU-US trade deal, where we accept to give tariff-free

22:32access

22:32to the European market for many, many goods from the U.S., but ourselves, you know, we see that we

22:37impose. What do you mean by diversifying? Is it buying from Brazil or India? Yeah, for example. I mean,

22:42you have your own industry, obviously, you know. You produce what you want to produce. In the first place,

22:45we have to produce ourselves. But secondly, no, no, but we produce ourselves. That's not, I mean,

22:51because you said before that we do not produce anymore. First of all, this deindustrialization,

22:56which is true and which is real, is not a gift from God. This is a consequence of policies that

23:04have

23:04been waged on this continent by your group. So let's not pretend this comes from nowhere. Workers throughout

23:10Europe have seen their jobs disappear in industry because of the policies, the market-driven policies

23:16your group has imposed on this continent. I agree with the point that Europe has its own

23:20responsibility here, but it clearly came from ideological left sources that we had these policies.

23:25But you were the one governing it. This was a market approach. How can you say the left is

23:30responsible for it? But this makes no sense. Listen, I'm ready to have a debate of ideas.

23:37I'm ready to have a debate of ideas. But you cannot say that it has been the left pushing for

23:43liberalization, that it has been the left pushing for privatization, for the sellout of our industries.

23:50This is just not true. This is center-right. But this makes no sense. I mean,

23:55let's have an honest debate on ideas. Let's have an honest debate on ideas. It's been the center-right,

24:03sometimes with social democrats in the coalition that has sold off our industries and that has

24:08privatized, liberalized our markets. And this would create, I don't know what kind of Eldorado.

24:13The reality today is what? Deindustrialization and a lot of issues for European industry.

24:20You have refused to invest sufficiently in public energy infrastructure. And today our industries

24:26are being chased away by the fact that the energy prices are too high. And still today you're

24:31sabotaging the cheapest energy that would be green energy, keeping us dependent on fossil fuels from

24:36I don't know what countries. All right. We'll come back to this. And now it's the time to move on

24:41to our

24:41fifth and final round. And we want to do something different now. I'm going to ask you a set of

24:50questions and you can only answer with a yes or no. Okay. Lukas, I'll start with you. Should there be

24:57a

24:57common European army? On the long run, yes. No, not now. No. Okay. Can Europe realistically build credible

25:06military autonomy without duplicating NATO structures? It's a long debate. I just want to say,

25:13yes, if that's the question, yes, we can. I think we should work on a common security architecture

25:18in Europe. Okay. No, we can't. We have to do it within NATO. We have to reform NATO such as

25:25UN also.

25:26And of course it will be within NATO because to have redundancies is the worst thing we can do with

25:32taxpayers' money and also with our security. Okay. Will NATO outlive Donald Trump?

25:39Absolutely. I hope not. You hope not? Yes. I mean, I think NATO today, you know,

25:44NATO is something that comes from the Cold War that had a sense at the time, the warshow pact against

25:50NATO. Today, we need a common European security architecture. NATO is something from the past and

25:55Donald Trump is the living illustration of this. Interesting. And finally, was there anything over

26:01the last half hour that you think your opponent said that you can agree with?

26:09I can't say that. Only maybe that European economic trouble is also based on our own European

26:16responsibility from the past. But I wouldn't direct that to the very center of politics. It was the

26:23extremists who were stronger over decades. Now we have better maturities in European Parliament. Now we

26:27lift burden from our businesses. So maybe we agree on that. And I'm very happy to be European,

26:34seeing that somebody from the far extremists, in that case, to the left, there are also ones to the

26:39right, are allowed to speak freely. And there are not many parts of the world where this is possible.

26:44Any agreements with Lucas Martin? Well, definitely not with this part. I mean, the far right has never

26:48been stronger in this parliament than you say that normal parties are stronger. That's very weird.

26:52One point I think I agree on is the fact that the issue with, let's say, defense and security is

26:59not

27:00a matter of more money. It's a matter of more cooperation, you know. And this, I think he said,

27:05but this kind of contradicts the position of saying we need more money for defense. But I agree on this

27:10part. We need more cooperation and more coordination. Wonderful. And that final answer brings us to the

27:16end of this edition of The Ring. Thanks again to Mark Buttenga and Lukas Mandl for a lively conversation

27:22here from the European Parliament. Thanks to our audience at home. If you like, you can continue

27:26the conversation by sending us your comments to theringateuronews.com. We'd love to have your

27:33feedback. That's it for today. I'm Stefan Grobe. Take care and see you soon on Euronews.

Category

Transcript

Comments

Recommended