Europe
Europe heading for a ‘military Schengen’
The long-proposed plan for a ‘military Schengen’ zone in Europe is already being implemented, according to an assessment in Foreign Policy (FP).
At the end of January, Germany, the Netherlands and Poland signed an agreement to create a military transport corridor between them. Siemtje Möller, Parliamentary State Secretary at the German Ministry of Defence, said the corridor would increase military mobility ‘on the way to a real military Schengen’.
It is not the first time that European politicians have floated the idea of adapting the existing visa-free movement of people and goods in the Schengen area to the movement of troops and military equipment throughout Europe, but the idea is now clearly gaining momentum.
The idea of a military Schengen first emerged after Russia’s annexation of Crimea. European military authorities are exploring the lessons of the Cold War, including military mobility.
But several experts, diplomats and military sources told FP that progress has been much slower than desired. “The liberalisation of the rules is agreed by everyone. But the problem is that we have been talking about it since 2015,” Tomasz Szatkowski, Poland’s permanent representative to NATO said.
Officials acknowledged that European countries have ‘a long way to go’ to effectively move their personnel and materiel.
The transition of anything related to a military mission in Europe is beset by obstacles ranging from bureaucratic hurdles to infrastructure gaps.
Baltic states fear no help in case of war
Urmas Paet, an Estonian MEP and vice-chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, rated military mobilisation ‘3 out of 10’ and suggested that it could currently take ‘weeks or at least more than a week’ to send supplies to the Baltic states.
The FP stresses that the ‘paperwork’ is cumbersome. Different permits have to be obtained from different ministries in different countries, and sometimes from different regions within a country, it said, adding that most roads and bridges are built for civilian use and are unlikely to withstand the weight of heavy military equipment.
As the central European fuel pipeline does not extend to the eastern countries, longer delays in fuel supplies could also be a decisive factor. In addition, track gauges in the former Soviet states are different from European gauges, and transferring thousands of troops and equipment from one train to another in a wartime situation could add to the time required.
Mini-military Schengen for the Balkans planned
“Now I hear ministers in various organisations talking about it,” Lieutenant General Ben Hodges, a former NATO commander who was the first to advocate military Schengen and is believed to have coined the term, told FP at the recent Munich Security Conference.
The ability to act quickly in a crisis is a crucial part of military deterrence doctrine, Hodges stressed. “We need to have not just equipment and troops, but the ability to move quickly, to get spare parts in, to store fuel and ammunition, and the Russians need to see that we have that,” the officer said, noting that a force’s ability to mobilise and move quickly must be visible to the enemy and deter them from attacking in the first place.
While welcoming the agreement between Germany, the Netherlands and Poland as a ‘great start’, Hodges points out that many more such corridors are under discussion.
Bulgaria’s chief of staff, Emil Eftimov, for example, said the allies should prioritise a corridor from Alexandroupoli in Greece to Romania and across the Adriatic to Albania and northern Macedonia.
“They want corridors from Greece to Bulgaria to Romania. The aim of all these corridors is to have a smooth route in terms of infrastructure, but also to get customs and all the legal obstacles out of the way,” Hodges said.
Germany-Netherlands-Poland corridor as a model
The Germany-Netherlands-Poland corridor is the first of many planned to identify and resolve bottlenecks and possibly provide a template for future corridors.
A senior military source, who spoke to FP on condition of anonymity, said the corridor would address a number of issues.In peacetime, he said, it would also allow authorities to smooth federal processes, as each state in Germany has its own laws for troops or dangerous equipment passing through its territory. In wartime, he added, the corridor would be ‘much more than a road’.Explaining that a hundred thousand or more soldiers would be on the move in a crisis, the military source said: “They would need a place to stop, rest, access spare parts depots and fuel depots.In such a scenario, we would also need arrangements to deal with war refugees,” the military source said.
This is a daunting task even for the three nations. Paet added that defence is a ‘national capability’ and ‘countries share as much as they want to share’. Countries do not easily share details of critical infrastructure, such as the location and number of bridges that have a military load classification and can support the weight of heavy tanks.
The EU’s roads and railways – not fit for war
There is also a lack of accurate data on infrastructure. According to a 2021 report by the Centre for European Policy Analysis (CEPA), 90 per cent of European roads, 75 per cent of national roads and 40 per cent of bridges can carry vehicles classified as military, with a maximum load of 50 tonnes.
The Leopard and Abrams tanks, both of which have been used against Russia on the Ukrainian battlefield, are significantly heavier.
“The Leopard tank weighs about 75 tonnes, I think, and the Abrams is a bit heavier. Most of these tanks will be transported behind HETs (heavy equipment transporters) and each HET weighs about 15 to 20 tonnes. There won’t be just one tank on the road,” he said.
CEPA also notes that the combination of trucks, trailers and heavy tanks could be well in excess of 120 tonnes and considers the existing infrastructure to be largely unsuitable for military movements.
The EU recognises the need to fund dual-use infrastructure – civil and military – and has already approved funding for 95 such projects.
But the Polish ambassador and Hodges said they were concerned that funding for the EU’s infrastructure financing instrument, the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF), had been cut from €6.5 billion to €1.7 billion.
German and French opposition to ‘investment in the East’
Rail Baltica, a transnational railway project funded by the CEF, plans to extend Europe’s rail network to the Baltic countries of Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia, and is due to be operational by 2030. But local news organisations are reporting concerns about funding.
Moreover, countries such as France, Belgium and even Germany are resisting the idea of investing in Eastern Europe to extend the Central European pipeline and using it for more general EU defence.
The European Defence Agency, which coordinates EU defence cooperation, is working on a common format for land and air mobility to standardise bureaucratic processes and simplify paperwork. But although it has been adopted by 25 member states, there is still reluctance among those that have not yet integrated these ‘technical rules’ into their national processes.
Europe
China’s critical mineral restrictions challenge EU defence expansion plans
The European Union’s plans to expand its defence capabilities are being hindered by China’s export controls and sales restrictions on critical raw materials.
In response, EU leaders are urging member states to accelerate efforts to diversify supply chains.
According to Nikkei Asia, the European Commission announced last week that it would propose new legislation requiring companies across the bloc to broaden their supplier base in an effort to address economic imbalances, although it did not explicitly name China.
The war in Ukraine and growing uncertainty over Washington’s security guarantees have pushed European governments to increase military spending and defence production.
At the same time, according to a report published in May by Joris Teer, a policy analyst at the European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS), China accounts for at least 70% of global mining or refining activity in 17 of the 34 materials classified as critical by the EU. Eight of those 34 materials are currently subject to Chinese export controls.
“China is undermining Europe’s rearmament efforts,” Teer wrote. “Simply by activating this tool, China has already increased its leverage and demonstrated both the capability and willingness to restrict supply whenever it chooses.”
The Aerospace, Security and Defence Industries Association of Europe also warned that geopolitical developments and intensifying global competition for critical raw materials are further underscoring the need to strengthen European supply chains.
The organisation represents more than 4,000 companies, including Britain’s BAE Systems, France’s Thales and Germany’s Rheinmetall.
European defence manufacturers are pursuing a range of strategies, including vertical integration, recycling, diversification and stockpiling.
Rheinmetall told Nikkei Asia that it has “no dependencies” and is “well prepared” regarding critical minerals.
A company spokesperson said: “Rheinmetall has stockpiled key raw materials sufficient for several years. We have also implemented IT systems that allow us to centrally monitor and precisely manage raw material consumption across the entire group.”
Analysts, however, caution that stockpiling alone will not be sufficient. Maria Shagina, a researcher at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said: “Stockpiling serves as an important buffer against sudden disruptions, but on its own it is unlikely to mitigate structural damage over the long term.”
Shagina added that replacing the volume and diversity of critical minerals controlled by Beijing with alternative sources would take years.
In 2024, the EU enacted the European Critical Raw Materials Act, aimed at rebuilding domestic supply chains for such minerals.
The legislation sets 2030 targets for domestic extraction, processing and recycling while limiting dependence on any single third-country supplier to 65%.
A €3 billion ($3.5 billion) fund was established last year to accelerate strategic projects.
Nevertheless, the European Court of Auditors has noted that the 2030 targets are not legally binding and that the EU remains far from achieving them.
Industry groups argue that policy inconsistencies could further slow progress.
The Cobalt Institute, which represents a sector vital to jet engines, advanced batteries and defence alloys, warned that proposed EU chemicals regulations risk undermining the industry.
“Europe has one foot in and one foot out,” said Michael Blakeney, head of government and public affairs at the London-based institute. “It says the right things, but its actions are inconsistent.”
Europe’s efforts are unfolding alongside a more aggressive US strategy to secure critical mineral supply chains.
Shagina said:
“The US is investing more capital to secure and expand capacity, taking greater financial risks and, in some cases, acquiring equity stakes. Europe, by contrast, is generally more cautious, which places it at a relative disadvantage in the competition for critical minerals.”
In April, the EU signed an agreement with the United States to coordinate supplies of critical minerals. Although some member states initially resisted over concerns that the deal could weaken the bloc’s strategic autonomy, they authorised the Commission in early June to join the US-led “Pax Silica” initiative, which coordinates investment and export-control policies.
Teer urged Europe to use ongoing US-EU-Japan negotiations as the nucleus of a broader coalition aimed at making critical mineral production outside China financially viable through state support, minimum-price mechanisms and supply rules.
“Particularly important are countries that either produce raw materials or possess significant mineral deposits, such as Malaysia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Brazil and Indonesia, as well as countries like India with large pools of skilled labour,” he said.
Teer also argued that the EU should activate its Anti-Coercion Instrument, which allows the bloc to impose tariffs and restrictions in response to economic pressure on countries outside the union, in order to deter China from introducing further restrictions.
A European Commission spokesperson said the bloc had “long been aware of the risks associated with the EU’s dependence on critical raw materials.”
“The objective is clear: to anticipate disruptions early and reduce the EU’s vulnerabilities while strengthening our industrial and defence capacities,” the spokesperson said.
Europe
Four European countries move to make citizenship harder to obtain
European countries are increasingly tightening their citizenship rules. Most recently, the Norwegian government has drafted legislation that would raise the minimum residency requirement for citizenship from three years to seven.
The proposed amendments to the citizenship law were presented by the Ministry of Labour and Social Inclusion.
Under the draft legislation, stateless individuals born in Norway, as well as those who arrived in the country as children, would be required to reside in Norway for at least five years before becoming eligible for citizenship.
The government also plans to increase residency requirements for foreign nationals who are married to or cohabiting with Norwegian citizens.
Language requirements are set to become more demanding as well. The proposal would raise the required level of spoken Norwegian proficiency from A2 to B1. The new rules would apply to applicants aged between 18 and 67.
Commenting on the changes, Minister of Labour and Social Inclusion Kjersti Stenseng said: “Obtaining and holding Norwegian citizenship should be a privilege.”
The government argues that simplifying administrative procedures while simultaneously tightening eligibility criteria will help reduce the country’s large backlog of pending applications and shorten processing times.
Norway is the latest European country to announce revisions to its citizenship rules.
In Finland, the minimum residency requirement for citizenship was increased from five years to eight years on October 1, 2024.
The country also plans to introduce a mandatory citizenship test for applicants aged between 18 and 64 from the beginning of 2027.
Finnish Interior Minister Mari Rantanen said: “The introduction of a citizenship test is the final component of a comprehensive reform aimed at making citizenship requirements more stringent.”
Sweden has also approved a similar reform. Beginning in June 2026, the standard residency requirement for citizenship will increase from five years to eight years. Authorities are also introducing a financial self-sufficiency requirement for applicants and expanding the scope of security screenings.
Explaining the rationale behind the changes, Migration Minister Johan Forssell said: “It was possible to become a citizen after living in the country for five years without knowing a single word of Swedish, learning anything about Swedish society, or even having one’s own source of income.”
The most far-reaching changes have been implemented in Portugal. Portuguese President Antonio Jose Seguro has signed legislation raising the minimum residency requirement for citizenship from five years to 10 years.
For citizens of the European Union and the Community of Portuguese Language Countries, the requirement has been set at seven years.
The residency period will now be calculated from the date a residence permit is granted rather than from the date a citizenship application is submitted. The new rules will also affect the children of immigrants.
Previously, children could obtain citizenship one year after birth if their parents held residence permits. Under the new rules, at least one parent must have legally resided in the country for a minimum of five years.
The law also introduces a mandatory examination covering Portuguese history, culture, values and social structures.
Migration policies are tightening across the European Union as well. On June 17, the European Parliament approved legislation allowing irregular migrants whose asylum applications have been rejected but who cannot be returned to their countries of origin to be deported to third countries.
The new EU rules permit the establishment of migrant detention centres outside the bloc’s borders. African countries are reportedly among the options being discussed for such facilities.
Europe
SpaceX warns EU satellite spectrum plan could disrupt connectivity in Ukraine
SpaceX has sharply criticised a European Union plan to restrict access to satellite spectrum, arguing that the proposal risks degrading connectivity in Ukraine and disrupting emergency communications services.
In a document shared with European officials and reviewed by the Financial Times, SpaceX warned:
“This proposal significantly increases the likelihood that Europeans will be deprived of direct-to-device satellite services, or that new European operations will create global interference issues, including for emergency services such as those operating in Ukraine.”
In a proposal unveiled in May, the EU recommended reserving part of the spectrum band used for direct satellite-to-smartphone connectivity for European operators, thereby limiting the frequencies available to US and Chinese providers.
The 2 GHz frequency band in question is currently used by two US companies, Viasat and EchoStar.
SpaceX argued that the EU plan prioritises “an operator’s country of establishment over economic, technical and regulatory realities.”
When the proposal was announced, EU technology chief Henna Virkkunen defended the move, saying the bloc wanted to “increase European capacity in this sector.” She added that other parts of the frequency band would remain open to international operators, arguing that prioritising European providers was justified.
Other participants involved in discussions over the proposal said some EU officials were specifically seeking to limit Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite network.
Europe’s initiative follows a warning from Washington. In March, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) cautioned that it could take retaliatory measures if the EU chose to favour European satellite operators over alternatives such as Starlink.
At the time, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr told the Financial Times: “Some of the discussions in Europe regarding satellite sovereignty concern us. If Europe decides to move down that path, then, as you know, we will have to consider reciprocal measures.”
The European Commission’s proposal has not yet entered formal negotiations with EU member states or the European Parliament.
A source close to SpaceX said the company remained hopeful of influencing the outcome of the process, given concerns raised by both businesses and several European governments.
-
Europe2 weeks agoAfD says Ukraine should compensate Germany over Nord Stream sabotage
-
Asia2 weeks agoPentagon adds Alibaba, Baidu and BYD to list of firms with alleged Chinese military ties
-
Opinion1 week agoA voice rising from New Delhi: BRICS’s manifesto for a new world order
-
Europe2 weeks agoToyota and JLR warn EU ‘Made in Europe’ rules could threaten jobs and investment
-
America2 weeks agoWorld Cup referee from Somalia denied entry to US as immigration scrutiny intensifies
-
Middle East1 week agoMine clearing in Strait of Hormuz could delay shipping traffic for up to 50 days
-
America7 days agoData leak exposes Peter Thiel’s secret ‘Dialog’ network of politicians, regulators, and tech elites
-
Diplomacy1 week agoIran discloses 14-point draft US peace accord detailing sanctions relief, regional security measures
