Defense ministers, senior military officials and arms industry representatives are gathering in London this week for the Defence and Security Equipment International (DSEI), considered the world’s largest military expo. But while the forum presents a vision of the future of warfare and new technologies, the real test for Europe is not in theoretical innovation but in whether it can mobilize quickly enough in reality.
This is what General Nick Carter, a former UK Chief of Defence Staff and current strategic advisor at the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, wrote in a commentary for Politico.
As the Atlantic Council recently noted, Europe’s problem so far has been a lack of political and military readiness to meet the challenge. But with a wavering US and a threatening Moscow, the continent is at a strategic crossroads: whether to take responsibility for its own defence and security or remain dangerously dependent on external powers.
It remains unclear whether the combined efforts of European leaders and a major increase in military budgets will come in time to save Ukraine without significant US assistance.
It is also questionable whether these measures will be able to restore deterrence in the Euro-Atlantic space before Russia dares to act openly by 2030.
Today, deterrence must also include the so-called "gray zone". Russia is already undermining NATO's Article 5 mutual defense treaty through hybrid attacks aimed at weakening the alliance's resolve without provoking a direct military response.
Such provocations are expected to escalate - including sabotage of undersea cables, cyberattacks on power grids, or "accidental" missile strikes near NATO territory. All of this is a deliberate strategy to expand Russian influence.
Meanwhile, on the battlefield in Ukraine, we are witnessing a mix of World War I and World War III - a real-time example of future conflicts.
In recent years, it has become clear how quickly the nature of war is changing and how the boundaries between land, sea, air, space and cyberspace are disappearing.
Ukraine has demonstrated impressive ingenuity, but Russia has also adapted its tactics with great speed and scale - using cheap drones, electronic jamming, artificial intelligence for targeting, and turning its economy into a war machine.
This year alone, within a few months, Moscow will produce 1,500 tanks, 3,000 armored vehicles and 200 ballistic missiles, thus equaling NATO's total annual production in just a few months.
In this context, Europe must build on the principle that whoever adapts the fastest has the best chance of winning.
As the military historian Sir Michael Howard has stressed: "Everyone makes mistakes, so the most important thing is to develop the ability to adapt faster than the enemy."
But this requires a fundamental rethink - not just what capabilities are needed today and tomorrow, but how European systems and institutions need to change to provide them.
This means increasing arms production, modernising armies, a new approach to military procurement and investing in the right mix of capabilities for current and future threats.
To support this process, the Tony Blair Institute has launched a programme to discuss European defence - including the distribution of responsibilities, the role of industry and the resilience of societies.
To some extent, Europe is getting on firmer ground - NATO members outside the US promised to increase their military spending to 3.5% of GDP, and the EU created a €150 billion fund (SAFE) to strengthen defense capabilities.
But these steps will prove insufficient if the funds are not spent quickly.
The UK admits that it will not reach its target before 2035, and Spain refuses to commit at all.
According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, just to fill the gaps in Europe's capabilities in the event of a US withdrawal, it would take about $1 trillion - an amount far exceeding SAFE.
The truth is that money alone is not enough. Without strategy, political will, national resilience, and structural reforms, investments will not translate into real capabilities.
Too often, military budgets are treated as jobs-creation programs rather than as security issues. Governments must honestly acknowledge: higher defense spending will mean tough trade-offs.
Today, while half of Britons expect a world war in the next decade, only a third support increasing the military budget if it means higher taxes or cutting other spending. And even 3.5% of GDP will not be enough without procurement reforms and "military thinking" in industry.
DSEI will showcase the technologies of the future, but the real question is whether Europe will find the will, speed and coordination to turn them into a real deterrent.
Our economies are 10 times larger than Russia's, our technological base is incomparably stronger, and our alliances are unparalleled. If we choose to act decisively, any threat from Russia can be contained.
The question is - will we?