French President Emmanuel Macron’s call to create a unified European army, independent of NATO, to defend the European continent in the face of major powers such as Russia, China and even the US, has sparked a political firestorm. The most notable of these reactions came from US President Donald Trump, who tweeted rejecting the proposal and criticizing the French President, heightening tensions between the two sides. At the official level, the US State Department commented on the idea of the European Union forming an independent army of member states, stating that the US opposes any actions that could contribute to weakening NATO. “That’s been a sustained entity that the United States government and many others supported for many years, and so we would not want the weakening of NATO”, US State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said on November 14, 2018.

Divergent Reactions 

Despite the varied reactions as to the possibility of translating this initiative into concrete action, the idea has been subject to a detailed assessment at all levels, exploring possibilities and challenges of implementing it, especially since it is not a new and has been put forward many times over the past years. Floating the idea comes in response to the pressure exerted by the US on the EU to deploy new NATO bases on European soil and the US demands for financing the military bases in Europe.

Over the last years, proposals were made on the possibility of joint defence cooperation in the EU but stopped short of building a unified European army. In 2017, the EU established a multi-billion-euro Defense Fund to develop European military capabilities, in response to the growing US hegemony over Europe, as well as Russian and Chinese interventions. France has also spearheaded efforts to create a nine-nation force that would be able to act swiftly to carry out joint military operations, evacuations from war zones, and provide relief in the event of natural disasters.

It should be noted that Germany, Britain, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal and the Czech Republic have endorsed the French initiative to protect Europe from external threats. For example, Chancellor Merkel expressed Germany’s position by saying that “We should work on a vision of one day establishing a real, true European army… I will propose the establishment of a European Security Council with a rotating  presidency, in which important decisions can be prepared faster”.

Apart from the feasibility of turning this initiative into reality, no doubt that the formation of a unified European army will have many implications on MENA regional security, especially in light of American and European presence in the Middle East, which is expected to be directly and indirectly affected. Here are the key implications: 

Parallel Coalitions

1- Re-charting the inter-state coalition map with the resultant implications for the region. It is expected that internal differences within NATO will lead to forging alternative and parallel coalitions, especially in view of Turkey’s escalating dispute with the NATO, and the former plans to buy the Russian S-400 missile defense system. The rift between Ankara and NATO began since the outbreak the Syrian crisis and deepened following the failed coup attempt in Turkey in July 2015, which prompted Turkey to pivot toward Eurasia, chiefly Russia and India at the expense of its relationship with NATO.

Multi-polarity

2- Breaking out of the American Hegemony: A successful formation of a unified European army would strengthen the multi-polarity of power in the world, creating other alternatives and an enabling climate to emancipate from the American domination. This is due to US stances on regional issues, which collide with the interests of many regional powers, the impact of American hegemony on their interests, as well as the changing attitudes with the change of US administrations, which in many instances run counter to regional interests and visions. 

In addition to the divergent visions between the EU and the US on regional crises, it should be borne in mind that the new force can become a new threat, since the European independence could increase its hegemonic ambitions and attempts to establish control over the Middle East region, given its history of expansionist and colonialist aspirations. 

New Conflicts

3- Intensifying the European-American tensions, which will be reflected mainly in the form of a struggle for hegemony between the two parties over the Middle East region and the consequent security deterioration and turmoil, amid the divergent views between the two sides over the various issues in the east Middle East, such as the Iranian nuclear program and the Jerusalem issue. Such differences may turn into flash points between the two sides in the region as the two parties seek to bolster their influence or, at least, to ensure that their interests are protected in a region that lacks a military bloc. 

Consequently, the expected moves of the Europeans to safeguard their interests in the region or enhance their influence will necessarily collide with Russian and American interests as well as the interests of NATO, and hence could trigger new conflicts in the region. As a result of such power struggle, which is expected to ensue from the creation of a unified European army, the rivalry could extend to the establishment of military bases, which the two parties are expected to move quickly to build to advance their influence.

European Expansion

4- Seeking a broader European military presence: Unlike the US, the European countries have not generally sought to use military force to support their foreign policy but have provided civilian assistance and maintained a limited military presence with goals different from those of the US. However, building a unified European military army will result in a wider military presence in the region, given the expected mounting disagreement between the Europeans and Americans and the desire of each side to defend its strategic interests.

Interlocking Relationships 

In conclusion, it is difficult to say for sure that creating a European army will have positive or negative impacts, given the interlocking circles of relations and interests with the various European powers and the US on the one hand, and the regional powers on the other. Some analysts argue that the most important result of building a European army is the ensuing balance of power and multi-polarity that would stand in the face of American hegemony and give way to the creation of similar blocs that will strike balance in the global power. Nevertheless, others voice fears over the consequences of such move on security, particularly amid the potential for a spiraling race for dominance between the two sides, to which the middle East will be a theater, which could pose a pivotal threat to regional security in the near future.