Reinis Pozņaks, a member of the European Parliament, and well known supporter of Ukraine, spoke about the necessity to remain diligent and reminded that it is only the beginning of strengthening defense capabilities.
“It is no secret that different European Union countries have different assessments of the possibility that Russian military aggression could also affect NATO member states in Europe in the foreseeable future. Countries geographically further from Russia perceive these risks more calmly, and vice versa. From this perspective, the fact that member states have recently been able to agree on a significant increase in defense spending is undoubtedly an achievement. People in Latvia, who are often concerned about whether our allies are taking the Kremlin’s plans and capabilities seriously enough, could breathe a sigh of relief,” says Pozņaks.
“However, in fairness, it should be noted that this is only the beginning of the journey, not a victorious finish. Moreover, it is not even a question of how precisely and responsibly the partners will implement the promise (to ensure that by 2035 spending on defense and security reaches 5% of the GDP of a given country). It should be understood that allocating money at the political level alone does not guarantee anything. The reason is that the several decades of relatively peaceful period that the West has enjoyed has also reduced the production capacities necessary for defense,” says the MP.
“This is not just a EU problem. In monetary terms, the US spent almost a trillion dollars on defense last year, which is four times more than China’s military spending. However, Americans are concerned that China’s advantage is a better-developed industry that can be adapted to military needs. And the concerns are justified. For example, last year the Pentagon set a goal of achieving a monthly production of 155 mm artillery shells of 75,000 by April 2025. In reality, the pace has been increased to 40,000. Similar in other positions.
The same in Europe.
The good news is that NATO member states in Europe are aware of this problem – both at the level of officials and experts.
For example, in March this year, the European Commission published a so-called white paper on European defense capabilities, which mentioned seven “gaps” that need to be closed.
In turn, the influential think tank “Kiel Institute for the World Economy” In June 2025, a meticulous analysis was published with the harsh title “Ready for war by 2030?”, which very specifically outlined several scenarios in the context of different types of weapons. Namely, how much should be produced to feel completely safe, and how much to feel relatively safe,” explains Pozniak.
“So Europe is increasing its defense spending and understands quite well what positions need to be strengthened. The question is – how to do it in practice? One of the problems is that cooperation between member states is still not close enough. For example, if we look at the analysis of the tank segment, we see that European countries have about 12 different types at their disposal. Here we want to ask – if Europe wants to increase tank production, how to do it relatively faster: should it work with each of the 12 types, or should it join forces for a smaller number? Another influential think tank, “Breugel”, commenting on the latest defense agreements, mercilessly criticized that achieving the set goals would be “unrealistic and politically impossible” if each country did it individually.
Closer cooperation means not only that countries coordinate in procurement and production.
In order for what is needed for defense to actually be produced, a political decision by even the highest-level officials is not enough.
There is no such thing as a single “cash register” in Brussels. In order for companies to be able to produce and, even more so, expand production, a financial system that is actively involved is needed. This “The system can be called a bank, a fund, or something else – it doesn’t matter that much. What matters is that the money allocated for defense doesn’t get bogged down in bureaucracy and the financial sector’s cautious attitude towards the military industry,” the MEP explains.
“It can be said that there is a sense of such risks, and there are also calls to treat them seriously. For example, the conclusions on security published by the European Council on the 26th of June, 2025 indicate that member states should not get entangled in different requirements for manufacturers, that medium-sized and small enterprises should also be involved. In the aforementioned document, the European Council says that in October 2025 it will evaluate how well the implementation of this and other recommendations is going. So, there are only a few months left, and then it will be possible to judge more about the extent to which the statements and promises are being implemented.
Such large-scale and complex issues as a significant improvement in defense capabilities, and in a relatively short period of time, cannot be resolved by one event, one meeting, no matter how high-level. There is no point in either panicking or, on the contrary, falling into euphoria based on how someone did not look at someone, did not shake hands or said something to the press. Strengthening the security of Latvia and Europe is and will be a long process in which we must not doze off and only get excited before summits or other high-level meetings,” says Pozņaks.
Read also: Russia furious over fishing ban in Norwegian waters