The Left Needs to Back a European Security Policy | Hanna Perekhoda

For decades, European countries have underinvested in defense, relying on American military power and assuming that large-scale conflict on the continent was a thing of the past. However, Russia’s war of aggression, combined with the dramatic shift in U.S. foreign policy that we are witnessing today, has exposed Europe’s vulnerability. With the United States abandoning Ukraine, a country that now stands as the last line of defense for European security, Europe faces a defining moment.

As authoritarianism rises globally and military alliances are crumbling, the question of military security can no longer be ignored. The real question now, particularly for the left, is whether it has a concrete program to address this crisis. If it merely continues to lament militarization without offering solutions to the very real security threats, it will be deserting politics altogether—abandoning society in favor of its own ideological purity and self-indulgence. Instead of advancing sterile slogans and thus avoiding any responsibility - a behavior symptomatic of being trapped in capitalist individualism - the left must propose practical solutions for the society of which it is a part.

Securing defense means investing money in it. Strictly speaking, we only have three solutions where we can find it. The most dangerous and regressive approach would be to slash social spending to fund military expansion. This is the route neoliberals are already proposing: reducing budgets for healthcare, education, pensions, and welfare to divert funds toward defense. Of course, they don’t put it that way, saying instead, like President Macron, that he wants to increase military spending "without raising taxes". However, it is evident that weakening social safety would deepen inequality, fuel social unrest, and ultimately destabilize democracies from the inside. At a time when far-right populism is on the rise, imposing austerity would rapidly strengthen anti-democratic forces. Given Russia’s and the U.S.’s overt support for these forces, such a move is exactly what Trump and Putin are hoping for.

Another solution would be to increase taxes on the ultra-wealthy and multinational corporations. Europe is home to some of the world’s richest individuals and most profitable businesses, many of which have benefited enormously from Europe’s stability. It is only fair that those who have profited the most from democracy should contribute the most to its defense. Implementing progressive wealth taxes, taxes on energy, and stronger corporate tax regulations could generate revenue without harming ordinary citizens. However, such a strategy requires strong coordination to prevent capital flight, as billionaires and corporations would undoubtedly attempt to relocate to low-tax jurisdictions. Trump’s recent announcement of golden visas for the ultra-rich signals that he is already preparing for such a scenario, offering the U.S. as a safe haven for tax avoiders.

Switzerland, meanwhile, is not in the EU for this very reason: it seeks to remain a tax haven. This is not new. During the times of international crises, when countries raised taxes to finance their war efforts, Switzerland welcomed billionaires with open arms and, as a result, became indecently wealthy. It may use the same strategy once again. Karin Keller-Sutter cozying up to JD Vance is something to read between the lines. The Swiss authorities want to reassure all their potential clients that they are still a safe haven for their money and will not hesitate to turn a blind eye to acts of disrespect or aggression against European countries in order to maintain this position.

The third option is to confiscate the €300 billion in frozen Russian central bank assets and use them to fund Ukraine’s defense and strengthen European security. It would hold Russia financially accountable for its war crimes while avoiding additional burdens on European citizens. However, European authorities fear that such a move would set a precedent that might make their financial systems appear less reliable to those who invade sovereign states and commit war crimes. Indeed, justice is a dangerous precedent in a system built on protecting the interests of the rich and powerful. If we were to acknowledge moral standards in its economic and political policies, it would risk putting into trouble the very foundations of capitalism itself. It is indeed an unthinkable scenario for those who benefit from its injustices.

Those that advocate for demilitarization struggle with one hard reality: Russia is already waging war on Ukraine, has violated international law, and actively engages in hybrid warfare within EU states. If left-wing parties want to remain relevant, they must develop a clear stance on defense strategy. Ignoring military security would only allow right-wing forces to dominate the conversation, portraying the left as naïve and detached from reality—and, in that case, they would not be wrong.

The left must reject the false choice between social justice and national security. Security should not be paid for by cutting pensions or healthcare, but by ensuring that billionaires and multinational corporations contribute their fair share. It could push for tax justice, for closing loopholes that allow corporations to avoid paying taxes and cracking down on offshore tax havens. The role of Swiss left is crucial here.

Instead of each nation massively increasing its own military budget, Europe could strengthen its collective security mechanisms. Energy security must be considered part of military strategy: by reducing reliance on Russian fossil fuels, we can prevent future economic blackmail from it. Even without increasing conventional military, Europe can and should strengthen cyber defense, intelligence-sharing, counter Russian propaganda, and enforce legal measures against election interference. The creation of a multilateral European defense project, independent from U.S. influence, needs to be examined. Diplomacy could also be rethought. Engaging with Africa, Latin America, and Asia could counterbalance US, China and Russia’s influence and limit Russia’s economic options.

But above all, the left must urgently push for the confiscation of Russian state assets. Delaying this decision out of concern for financial elites only emboldens aggressors.

(Author: Hanna Perekhoda is a political scientist, currently associated with Centre d’histoire internationale et d’études politiques de la mondialisation at the University of Lausanne in Switzerland)