REINDUSTRIALIZATION AS A GEOPOLITICAL PROJECT: BUILDING EUROPEAN DEFENCE SOVEREIGNTY BETWEEN WASHINGTON, BEIJING AND MOSCOW
REINDUSTRIALIZATION AS A GEOPOLITICAL PROJECT: BUILDING EUROPEAN DEFENCE SOVEREIGNTY BETWEEN WASHINGTON, BEIJING AND MOSCOW

Summary/Abstract: This article analyzes European war reindustrialization 2022¬2025 as a geopolitical project whose strategic significance transcends a cyclical reaction to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and whose final scope depends on the trilateral relationship with Washington, Beijing and Moscow. The research applies a mixed-methods approach integrating quantitative analysis of military expenditures and industrial capacities of European NATO members, comparative institutional analysis of EU regulatory instruments (EDIS, EDIP, ASAP, EDF, PESCO, Strategic Compass), and qualitative analysis of strategic documents and reports of peer-reviewed security institutions (SIPRI, HSS, EUISS) over the 2019¬2025 period. Empirical findings show that the military expenditures of European NATO members rose from approximately USD 280 billion in 2019 to over USD 454 billion in 2024, with Germany recording 28%, Poland 31% and Sweden 34% growth in 2024 alone, while at the same time deepening structural dependence on US defence technology, Chinese control of strategic raw materials and the Russian security threat as a mobilizer. From the findings the original concept of selective strategic autonomy (SSA) is derived — a model that differs from both the Atlanticist and the neutralist paradigms and recognizes that Europe can develop sovereignty only in clearly defined sectors and only through conscious management of reciprocal dependencies. An empirically operationalized Geopolitical Reciprocity of Reindustrialization Index (GRR Index) is also proposed as an analytical tool for comparing the degree of sovereignty maturity across European states. The implications indicate that European reindustrialization represents a historical inflection point whose outcome will be determined not only by the volume of investment but by the capacity to manage the trilateral geopolitical game.

• Details
• Contents