Germany’s leading foreign policy journal, Internationale Politik, calls for significant rearmament and militarization efforts to strengthen European influence in the Asia-Pacific region.

According to Internationale Politik, published by the German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP), European nations should rapidly expand their armed forces and take control not only of their own continent but also, “if necessary, the Mediterranean, the Red Sea, and the Strait of Bab el-Mandeb,” to “reduce reliance on U.S. troops in Europe.”

If successful, the journal argues, the United States would retain adequate military capacity “in the event of a war in the Indo-Pacific.” In such a scenario, European nations should also prepare for a potential conflict with China and enhance their defense industrial capacity to replenish depleted U.S. munitions if required.

The ‘Asianization’ of security architecture

Calls for a stronger German and European military presence in the Asia-Pacific are driven by the intensifying power struggle between the West and China and the increasing inclination of Asian nations to pursue independent military policies rather than aligning with declining Western dominance.

Felix Heiduk, director of the Asia Research Group at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), describes this trend as the “Asianization” of regional security architecture.

Indonesia exemplifies this shift. Since 2007, Indonesia has conducted regular military exercises with the United States, the latest spanning August 26 to September 6, 2024. However, Jakarta has also expanded ties with Russia. During a recent meeting with President Vladimir Putin, Indonesia’s current president and former defense minister, Prabowo Subianto, expressed that he sees Russia as a “great friend” and intends to strengthen relations with Moscow.

Last week, Russia and Indonesia held their first joint military exercises, which Jakarta considers a demonstration of its independent foreign and military policy.

The ‘Indo-Pacific’ as a Japanese-American concept and Germany’s role

The concept of the Indo-Pacific frequently underpins arguments for expanding military activities into the Asia-Pacific. In Internationale Politik, Heiduk clarifies that this term is “neither geographically neutral nor value-neutral” but rather “purely political.”

Heiduk explains that the concept of a “Free and Open Indo-Pacific”, which the U.S. adopted from Japan, aims to encircle China and maintain U.S. hegemony in Asia. He further notes that Germany is also entangled in this geopolitical struggle.

Heiduk points to Germany’s Asia-Pacific military deployments in 2021 and 2024, along with maneuvers involving German air and ground forces in Australia and other countries in the region. These actions align with Berlin’s official Indo-Pacific Strategy—a conflict framework Germany has adopted in alignment with the U.S. in its great power struggle with China.

Europe’s Need to Rebuild Its Land Armies

Max Bergmann, an expert from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, illustrates the pressure for greater militarization in the Asia-Pacific in a recent article for Internationale Politik.

Bergmann describes European nations as lacking “hard power,” noting that European armies have been underfunded for two decades and that rebuilding ground forces should be the priority. He argues that while Britain and France possess advanced weapons systems, including anti-submarine capabilities, their forces are “too thinly deployed.”

While Russia remains the immediate military priority for Europe, Bergmann sees a long-term role for European security in the Indo-Pacific.

Reducing the U.S. military rresence in Europe

The CSIS expert suggests six strategic steps Europe can take to reduce U.S. military presence.

The first step, according to Bergmann, is for Europe to focus on securing the continent, the Mediterranean, and, if needed, the Red Sea and Bab el-Mandeb. This would allow the U.S. to concentrate fully on the Indo-Pacific if war broke out in the region.

Bergmann notes that in such a conflict, the U.S. could dedicate its full military production capacity to support Indo-Pacific logistics, but only if Europe is militarily fortified.

Beyond the ‘third way’ for Europe

Bergmann proposes additional diplomatic and security roles for European states. He advocates strengthening relations with countries like Vietnam, which have limited ties with the U.S. However, he emphasizes that Europe should not pursue a “Gaullist third way” between the U.S. and China since European interests align closely with U.S. strategic interests.

Finally, Bergmann recommends that European states establish stronger military-political and arms-industrial partnerships within the Asia-Pacific and, ultimately, bolster their own military presence in the region. The most effective way to achieve this, he suggests, would be to organize a European naval mission under the EU flag to coordinate all European naval activities in the Asia-Pacific.

Friedrich Merz, leader of Germany’s conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU), announced on Wednesday that the constitutional debt brake, which limits public deficits to 0.35% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), could be open to reform under certain conditions.

Merz, the frontrunner to become Germany’s next chancellor after the collapse of the country’s “traffic light” coalition, has previously argued that Germany should adhere to the constitutionally guaranteed debt brake, a measure introduced by his party under Angela Merkel in 2009.

The debate over debt brake reform within the CDU was reignited this year by Berlin’s conservative mayor Kai Wegner. Several powerful CDU leaders from regional governments have also supported the reform push, as these states face more constraints than the federal government and lack the flexibility for new borrowing.

Merz: Revision possible if borrowing is for investment

Pressure is mounting within the party, with CDU state premiers urging Merz to include debt brake reform plans in the campaign for the early elections on 23 February.

Speaking at an event on Wednesday, Merz stated: “Of course, reform is possible. The question is: why? To what end? What would be the result of such a reform?”

Merz emphasized that he would not support reform aimed at increasing consumption or social policy spending. However, he suggested that if additional borrowing were used to increase investment, “then the answer could be different.”

According to the Greens, the only way out of the crisis is a revision of the debt brake

Merz noted that the debt brake was a “technical issue” and stated that he did not wish to engage in the discussion at that moment. Later, a source close to the CDU leader told Reuters that Merz had no immediate plans to reform the debt brake.

However, Bruno Hönel, a member of the Bundestag’s budget committee from the Greens, argued that if Merz assumed power, the debt brake would be reformed immediately, pointing out that the budget could not be financed without borrowing during such a crisis.

Hönel stated, “If you want to work with the budget in a forward-looking way, there is no other way than to reform the debt brake.” He also noted that 80 billion euros would be needed to meet NATO’s 2% defense spending target by 2028, nearly 30 billion euros more than the draft budget for 2025, which currently envisions defense spending of 53 billion euros.

Traffic light coalition collapses over debt brake debate

The debt brake was a key factor in the collapse of the coalition, leading to calls for early elections.

Christian Lindner, leader of the fiscally conservative Free Democrats (FDP), who was dismissed as finance minister last week by Social Democrat Chancellor Olaf Scholz, claimed that Scholz had pressured him to suspend the debt brake.

Suspending the debt brake in an emergency, citing special circumstances, is possible with a government majority. Germany reinstated the debt brake in 2024 after a four-year suspension to allow for extra spending on the COVID-19 pandemic and the energy crisis.

CDU’s sister party CSU opposes reform

However, reforming the debt brake requires a two-thirds majority in both the Bundestag and the Bundesrat.

The CDU premiers from the eastern states support the debt brake reform, while Markus Söder, the leader of Bavaria’s CSU, opposes it. Söder emphasized that “absurd extra spending” must be cut first.

Before discussing the debt brake, Söder argued that the fiscal equality of federal states must be addressed, referring to Germany’s income redistribution system.

The wealthy state of Bavaria recently had to transfer over €9 billion to other states. “This cannot go on,” Söder declared.

The Dutch Ministry of Migration has announced that border controls will be introduced along land borders with other EU Schengen area countries and on certain flights within the Schengen zone starting December 9.

These six-month border controls are part of a broader immigration policy shift proposed by the right-wing coalition led by Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party (PVV), known for its anti-immigration stance.

Migration Minister Marjolein Faber introduced the policy through an official press release following its approval by the Council of Ministers. Faber, representing the PVV, stated, “It is time to take concrete action against irregular migration and people smuggling. That is why we will reintroduce border controls in the Netherlands starting in December.”

The border control measures will officially take effect on December 9. The Netherlands asserts that this decision complies with EU law, which requires member states to notify Brussels at least four weeks in advance when intending to restrict freedom of movement.

Earlier this year, Faber indicated to Brussels that the Netherlands also sought to opt-out of EU refugee obligations.

Geert Wilders, who led the PVV to victory in last year’s elections, celebrated this move on social media, emphasizing that the PVV has kept its promise. Wilders has long advocated for closing the Dutch borders to curb migration and strengthen national security.

Faber did not disclose specific details on how these border controls will be implemented. The plan does not allocate additional funding to the national police for these duties; instead, the six-month controls will rely on existing resources. Faber noted that the border checks should be conducted in a way that minimizes traffic disruption.

The Netherlands shares extensive land borders with Germany and Belgium, where police currently conduct spot checks. Last month, Germany implemented similar border checks with France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Denmark, and the Netherlands, citing concerns over extremist threats.

Both Germany and the Netherlands are part of the Schengen area, a border-free travel zone that includes most EU states along with Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland.

Under EU law, member states are permitted to temporarily reintroduce border controls in cases of serious security threats. However, the EU guidelines specify that such measures should be a last resort and strictly time-limited.

Following recent incidents involving Israeli football hooligans and Arab and Muslim communities in Amsterdam, the PVV and Wilders called for the deportation of migrants involved, asserting that irregular migration contributes to increased anti-Semitism.

‘Pogrom’ or ‘Zionist provocation’: What happened in Amsterdam?