High-Level Breakfast Conversation on Europe’s Security Architecture

Moderated by BIG’s director Luuk van Middelaar, the discussion featured the report’s co-chairs – former US ambassador to NATO and CEO of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs Ivo Daalder, ECFR’s Camille Grand and Daniela Schwarzer from the Bertelsmann Stiftung – along with task force member and former Dutch defence minister Kajsa Ollongren, as well as EU officials from across the institutions, NATO officials, ambassadors, and representatives from think tanks and the media.

The conversation explored the state of the transatlantic relationship and the future of Europe’s security architecture at a moment of rapid, historic change. Europe is still reeling after President Trump and his defence secretary Pete Hegseth sidelined Ukraine and Europe in peace talks with Putin, and J. D. Vance pointed the finger at Europe’s ‘enemy within’ in a speech at the Munich Security Conference (14–16 Feb). Heads of state, EU leaders and the NATO Secretary General held talks at an emergency summit in Paris (17 Feb), called in response by President Macron.

The Brussels breakfast conversation addressed whether US tactics can jolt Europe into action, either through the creation of a European Pillar within NATO or on its own terms. Current command-and-control structures, such as the US-led Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) and Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF), were discussed, assessing whether they are fit for purpose in a continent at war, now that US support is no longer a given. Intelligence and information sharing between NATO and the EU was shown to be lacking. Other partnerships, including those with the UK and with Asian countries, were also discussed.

All participants agreed that the consequences of underinvestment in and the outsourcing of Europe’s defence for the past quarter of a century cannot be reversed in a matter of months. Europeans will need to demonstrate collective political resolve to rise to the occasion, investing in their own security architecture and improving efficiency. They must also consider how to interpret Hegseth’s recent remarks that Europe should be ‘empowered’ to defend itself. 

Just four weeks into Trump’s presidential term, the reliability of the transatlantic partnership over the next four years can no longer be taken for granted. Europe cannot remain beholden to a dominant protector, whose security umbrella comes at a price it cannot afford. Europe needs to act in its own interests rather than seeking to please or placate the US, despite having been its closest ally since the end of the Second World War. It will require understanding of how to distribute leadership roles and organize collective responsibility for security on the continent.  By extension, Europe will also need to shed its sense of victimhood and affirm its agency and place on the map.