Europe’s approval of €38 billion in initial defence investments under its €150 billion Security Action for Europe (SAFE) framework is being presented as a milestone in strategic autonomy and industrial modernisation. Within Europe, the move is framed as necessary, responsible, and overdue.
But from the perspective of the Global South, Europe’s accelerating defence rise carries far more complex implications — economic, geopolitical, and developmental.
At a time when many developing nations are grappling with sovereign debt crises, climate vulnerability, food insecurity, and widening inequality, Europe’s large-scale military financing raises uncomfortable questions:
-
Will Europe’s rearmament reinforce global inequalities?
-
Could defence-driven industrial policy crowd out climate and development funding?
-
Does Europe’s strategic autonomy come at the expense of global economic balance?
Understanding Europe’s defence expansion requires stepping outside Brussels and viewing the shift from Africa, South Asia, Latin America, and Southeast Asia — regions that increasingly define global growth and demographic momentum.
A Changing Global Order — But Whose Security?
European policymakers argue that the SAFE scheme strengthens continental resilience in an increasingly volatile geopolitical environment. The initiative incentivises joint procurement, boosts industrial capacity, and prioritises European-made systems.
From the Global South, however, security priorities look different.
Many developing countries face threats that are not primarily military but structural:
-
Climate-induced displacement
-
Agricultural collapse due to extreme weather
-
Water scarcity
-
Debt distress
-
Youth unemployment
-
Public health fragility
In 2024–2025, over 50 developing countries were identified as being at high risk of debt distress. Climate adaptation funding gaps remain enormous, with annual shortfalls estimated in the hundreds of billions of euros.
Against this backdrop, Europe’s mobilisation of €150 billion for defence prompts a broader debate about global resource allocation. While European security concerns are legitimate, critics in the Global South argue that international instability often stems less from conventional warfare and more from economic and climate imbalances.
Defence Spending vs Development Commitments
Europe has historically positioned itself as a champion of multilateralism, development assistance, and climate leadership. The European Union and its member states collectively remain among the largest providers of official development assistance (ODA) globally.
Yet development actors across Africa and Asia observe a noticeable shift in budgetary focus toward defence, industrial security, and border management.
Although defence loans under SAFE are separate from development budgets, the broader fiscal reality matters. European governments operate within constrained public finance frameworks. Increased military commitments may reduce political appetite for expanding development spending, particularly during periods of domestic economic pressure.
For Global South policymakers, the concern is not simply numerical — it is strategic. If European political discourse becomes increasingly dominated by security concerns, migration control, and industrial protectionism, development cooperation risks becoming secondary.
Industrial Policy and Trade Rebalancing
The SAFE scheme is more than a defence mechanism; it is an industrial strategy. By prioritising European production, it strengthens domestic supply chains and technological sovereignty.
From a Global South perspective, this industrial reorientation could reshape trade dynamics.
European defence manufacturing relies on advanced components, semiconductors, critical minerals, and rare earth elements — many sourced from Africa, Latin America, and parts of Asia. As Europe seeks greater strategic autonomy, it may attempt to diversify or internalise segments of these supply chains.
This shift could have mixed consequences:
Potential Opportunities
-
Increased demand for critical minerals such as lithium, cobalt, and nickel
-
New industrial partnerships in dual-use technologies
-
Technology transfer in specific collaborative frameworks
Potential Risks
-
Stricter export controls on sensitive technologies
-
Reduced openness in European procurement markets
-
Strategic stockpiling that distorts commodity markets
For resource-rich developing nations, Europe’s defence expansion may increase commodity leverage — but without structural industrial upgrading, many will remain stuck at the raw-material stage of global value chains.
Strategic Autonomy and Geopolitical Competition
Europe’s push for strategic autonomy occurs in a broader context of intensifying great-power competition. The United States, China, Russia, and regional powers are all recalibrating military and industrial strategies.
From the Global South, this multipolar competition often translates into diplomatic pressure.
Countries in Africa and Southeast Asia frequently face balancing acts between major powers. Europe’s stronger defence posture may increase its geopolitical assertiveness, particularly in regions historically tied to European influence.
There are already signs of heightened European engagement in:
-
The Sahel region
-
The Red Sea corridor
-
The Indo-Pacific maritime sphere
While framed as stabilisation efforts, some observers argue that renewed European defence activism risks reviving perceptions of external interventionism.
For Global South governments seeking strategic neutrality, increased militarisation among major blocs complicates diplomatic positioning.
Climate Security: A Missing Link?
One of the most pressing critiques from the Global South concerns the imbalance between defence spending and climate financing.
Climate change remains the most significant long-term threat to many developing nations. Rising sea levels threaten small island states; desertification affects agricultural economies; extreme weather disrupts infrastructure and livelihoods.
Although European defence investment can include dual-use technologies with civilian benefits, the scale of climate adaptation financing remains insufficient relative to needs.
Estimates suggest developing countries require hundreds of billions annually for adaptation and mitigation. Meanwhile, global military expenditure surpassed €2 trillion in recent years.
This contrast fuels a perception gap: while Europe accelerates defence readiness, vulnerable nations continue waiting for climate finance pledges to materialise fully.
Some Global South analysts argue that genuine global security would prioritise climate resilience as heavily as conventional defence systems.
Debt, Loans, and Financial Architecture
SAFE operates primarily through long-term loans rather than grants. While this model may be fiscally prudent within Europe, it highlights a contrast in global financial governance.
Developing nations often face high borrowing costs in international markets. Many advocate for reform of multilateral development banks to allow concessional financing for climate and infrastructure.
From this perspective, Europe’s ability to mobilise €150 billion in affordable financing for defence underscores inequalities in global financial architecture.
If advanced economies can leverage collective credit mechanisms for military industrial policy, Global South leaders argue similar creativity should apply to climate adaptation, healthcare systems, and food security.
The Risk of a Global Arms Spiral
Historically, significant defence expansions by major powers can trigger security dilemmas.
If Europe strengthens its military-industrial base, other regional powers may respond with their own investments. This dynamic risks escalating global military expenditure, diverting resources from development priorities.
For many Global South nations, increased global militarisation creates secondary consequences:
-
Higher arms imports
-
Regional power rivalries
-
Reduced diplomatic space
-
Increased vulnerability to proxy conflicts
While Europe emphasises deterrence and stability, perceptions abroad may differ.
Opportunities for Partnership — If Managed Carefully
Despite concerns, Europe’s defence rise does not inevitably undermine Global South interests. Much depends on implementation and diplomatic strategy.
Opportunities could include:
Technology Cooperation
Dual-use technologies in cybersecurity, space monitoring, and disaster response could be shared through structured partnerships.
Climate-Security Integration
European defence innovation in energy efficiency and resilient infrastructure could support climate adaptation projects in vulnerable regions.
Transparent Procurement Policies
Maintaining open trade channels and fair access to European markets can prevent protectionist backlash.
Balanced Budgetary Commitments
Ensuring defence growth does not erode development and climate funding would signal continued commitment to multilateralism.
The Global South’s response will be shaped less by Europe’s spending itself and more by how Europe integrates defence with inclusive global engagement.
A Test of Europe’s Global Identity
Europe has long portrayed itself as a normative power — promoting multilateral cooperation, rule-based order, and human rights.
The SAFE initiative tests whether Europe can combine strategic autonomy with global responsibility.
If defence integration strengthens Europe internally but narrows its outward engagement, the Global South may interpret the shift as retrenchment.
If, however, Europe pairs military modernisation with expanded climate finance, equitable trade relations, and genuine partnership, it could redefine strategic autonomy as compatible with global development.
Security Beyond Borders
Europe’s €150 billion defence mobilisation is reshaping its industrial and geopolitical posture. For European policymakers, it represents overdue modernisation and resilience.
For the Global South, it raises deeper structural questions about priorities, power balances, and the meaning of global security.
True security in the 21st century extends beyond territorial defence. It encompasses climate resilience, food systems, public health, economic inclusion, and technological equity.
Whether Europe’s defence rise contributes to a more stable multipolar world — or intensifies global divides — will depend on the choices that accompany the funding.
The SAFE scheme is not merely a financial tool. It is a signal of Europe’s future trajectory.
