Militarization in Europe: Saving the political elite, theft from the public purse and US’s arms monopolies

Europe’s NATO defense ministers agreed to increase military spending to 5% of GDP. Secretary General Rutte told Chatham House that “even when the war in Ukraine ends, the threat will not go away” and called on “Washington’s European allies” to increase their air and missile defense budgets by 400%. The European Commission has recently announced that its post-Covid-19 recovery fund can now also be used to finance defense spending.

Fabrizio Verde, the Director of l’AntiDiplomatico, answered these and more in ​​an interview with Tolga Dişçi.

Propping up a failing political elite

What exactly is going on in Europe? Is Europe really preparing for a war?
Europe is accelerating a dangerous, self-serving militarization campaign disguised as “collective security.” The surge in military spending—NATO’s 5% GDP target, Rutte’s 400% missile defense demand, and Germany’s conscription talks—isn’t about genuine defense. It’s an economic stimulus for Germany’s industrial machine and the U.S. military-industrial complex, exploiting fear to fuel profits. The European Commission’s repurposing of post-COVID recovery funds for defense is particularly cynical, diverting public money from social needs to arms dealers.

This aggressive escalation against Russia serves one purpose: propping up a failing political elite. By manufacturing perpetual threat narratives, these leaders cling to power, distracting from domestic crises like inequality and democratic erosion. The “Russian threat” is their lifeline—a pretext to justify austerity for citizens and luxury for contractors.

Europe isn’t preparing for an inevitable war; it’s actively courting conflict to enrich arms conglomerates and consolidate elite control. German industry (think Rheinmetall, Thyssenkrupp) and U.S. giants (Lockheed Martin, Raytheon) are the real beneficiaries—not European citizens, who’ll bear the cost through slashed public services and forced conscription. This isn’t defense policy; it’s a wealth transfer to the powerful, disguised as patriotism.

“Europe lacks both the capacity and the sovereignty”

Does Europe have the resources and the production power to handle such an expansion of arms? Will it be able to produce the weapons itself? And what do you think Brussels is counting on to finance it?

Europe lacks both the capacity and the sovereignty for this reckless militarization. Despite grandiose rhetoric about “strategic autonomy,” its arms industry remains fragmented, under-resourced, and critically dependent on U.S. technology and components. Rheinmetall and MBDA can’t even produce enough artillery shells for Ukraine today—let alone meet NATO’s fantasy targets. The truth? “Made in Europe” weapons rely on American semiconductors, missiles, and satellites. This isn’t defense; it’s a colonization of Europe’s industrial base by U.S. contractors.

As for financing, Brussels is orchestrating a theft from the public purse. First, it’s repurposing post-COVID recovery funds—meant for hospitals and welfare state—to buy Raytheon missiles. Second, it will force austerity onto citizens: Germany already slashed social spending to fund its €100 billion “special army fund.” Third, watch for “European Defense Bonds”—a new debt scam to make taxpayers subsidize arms dealers.

The elites know this is unsustainable. Their gamble? That war panic will let them override fiscal rules, privatize state assets, and divert EU cohesion funds to pad Lockheed Martin’s profits. When Rutte demands 400% more spending, he’s not speaking as NATO’s chief—he’s a lobbyist for the American war machine.

This isn’t about security; it’s a crisis capitalism playbook. German industry gets assembly-line crumbs (while U.S. firms take the profits), Brussels breaks its own deficit rules to feed the war economy, and citizens lose schools, pensions, and healthcare.

The Secretary General of NATO talks about the possibility of a Russian invasion of Europe. Do you see such a danger, and what is the general opinion of European citizens?

The “Russian invasion” myth collapses under strategic reality. Russia’s core interests lie in securing its borders, not wars with NATO. This scare tactic only serves elites who need eternal enemies to justify their power. Citizens know it: 67% of Germans dismiss Russia as a threat, while French polls show 61% blame NATO expansion for tensions. When governments slash pensions to fund “defense”, 82% call it betrayal.

People see the truth: Russia has no motive to invade. The real danger lies in leaders fabricating threats to distract from their failed policies. NATO’s drumbeat of war isn’t security—it’s the sound of democracy being hollowed out.

Meloni’s policy

It is known that governments in some EU member states are keeping their distance from this process. Where does Italy stand in this policy of armament and of provoking war against Russia? Is there any likelihood of a pro-peace attitude in the government or in the opposition?

Italy’s government performs a cynical balancing act: rhetorically “distancing” from French-German warmongering while quietly escalating arms shipments to Ukraine. This isn’t principled pacifism—it’s opportunistic theater for Trump, designed to position Rome as Washington’s favored European subordinate. Meloni could support genuine peace actors like Hungary and Slovakia, who block EU weapons funding and demand diplomacy. Instead, she offers empty gestures (e.g., the Italy-Ukraine “grain corridor”) while approving new artillery deals with Germany’s Rheinmetall. The mainstream opposition is complicit. The Democratic Party (PD) parrots the EU war narrative, attacks Orbán as “Putin’s puppet” for seeking ceasefires, and cheers weapons production. They’ve become indistinguishable from the militarist elite. Only the Movimento Cinque Stelle (M5S), despite its flaws, provides consistent anti-war opposition: rejecting arms transfers, exposing hidden military spending (like €2bn diverted from earthquake reconstruction), and demanding EU-Russia negotiations. They’re Italy’s sole parliamentary force challenging the war economy. The bleak truth: Italy rejects real peace. Backing Hungary/Slovakia would mean defying EU orders.

The US and Europe: not partnership, but predatory outsourcing

What do you think is the role of the US in this policy of armament and preparation for war, which is pursued by the EU authorities and presented to them through NATO? Is Europe able to build this security architecture separately from the US?

The so-called US Deep State fuels Europe’s war preparations with a singular goal: transform Europe into a fortress against Russia, so Washington can redirect its full military and economic might toward containing China. This isn’t partnership—it’s predatory outsourcing. By binding Europe to U.S. weapons systems (where even “European” missiles rely on American chips and satellites), Washington ensures profits flow to Raytheon and Lockheed Martin while Europe bleeds its social budgets dry. NATO serves as the enforcement mechanism: when Rutte demands 400% spending hikes, he acts as America’s auctioneer, selling European sovereignty to Pentagon contractors.

Europe possesses the resources for true autonomy but remains shackled to a corpse—the obsolete Euro-Atlantic security model. The alternative path is clear: join rising powers at forums like the Third Eurasian Security Conference in Minsk, which seeks to draft a Charter of Multipolarity, replacing NATO’s confrontation with cooperative security. Yet Europe’s elites sabotage this future. They profit from German arms exports (up 40% since 2022) and fear Washington’s retaliation. In this grand betrayal, they sacrifice a continent to serve America’s Asian pivot—paying for their own funeral as a sovereign entity.

Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman

In your opinion, who/which segments in Europe will benefit, and who will be harmed by the policy of armament and preparation for war? What can be done to stop this process?

The beneficiaries of Europe’s militarization are overwhelmingly U.S. arms monopolies—Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman—whose profits and stock valuations have exploded since NATO’s war escalation began. These corporations thrive by binding Europe to perpetual dependency, ensuring every missile system, satellite, and AI tool sold to Brussels transfers wealth and sovereignty across the Atlantic. Secondary gains flow to Europe’s own war profiteers, like Germany’s Rheinmetall, exploiting panic to expand arms factories while social budgets implode.

The victims are Europe’s peoples, sacrificed to feed this machine. Pensions evaporate in Berlin, hospitals are starved of funding in Rome and Lisbon, and schools crumble in Marseille—all collateral damage of the 400% spending surge demanded by NATO. This austerity is not accidental but intentional: the deliberate cannibalization of welfare states. Stopping this requires uncompromising popular rebellion. Citizens must paralyze arms production through strikes, occupy public squares. Furthermore, every war-wave party must be punished at the ballot box. The message must be clear: the war party has had its day; this is the era of the multipolar world.