How to protect Europe from drones?
EU leaders convened at an informal summit in Copenhagen on Wednesday to discuss, among other things, plans for a 'drone wall' proposed by the European Commission. Numerous recent airspace violations – especially in host country Denmark – have highlighted the need for protective measures against drones. Europe's press discusses the priorities and problems of joint defence.
No need to reinvent the wheel
According to Kleine Zeitung, Europeans can learn much from Ukraine when it comes to drones:
“Should Europe really invest heavily in drone fleets and electromagnetic jammers which could be obsolete a year from now due to rapid technological advances? Or should it focus on developing the expertise and capacity for rapidly scalable production? However, if it acts wisely, there are many areas in which Europe doesn't need to reinvent the wheel. Because right now there is almost no other country with as much expertise and practical experience with drones as Ukraine, which would also be willing to share its knowledge with Europeans. After all, the only thing that can combat drones is drones.”
It's not just missiles and drones that are dangerous
Corriere della Sera warns that Europe shouldn't rely too much on military aspects in its security planning:
“The attacks on airports, the most spectacular and grave manifestation to date of the cyberwarfare that has been used against European countries for years (and has intensified since the invasion of Ukraine), should have made clear to everyone that wars today are no longer waged solely with firearms and soldiers on the ground. They should make the public realise that one country or another could be plunged into chaos and even reduced to despair and starvation without missiles, drones or tanks being deployed. And that countermeasures must therefore be taken to prevent this from happening one day.”
Get rid of the unanimity principle
The EU must finally overcome the blockades that are hindering its progress, urges L'Echo:
“There are strong indications of paralysis in many areas: Paris and Berlin are showing little support for the drone wall, and Ukraine's accession and the renewal of sanctions are being blocked by Hungary, which remains loyal to Moscow. ... What will it take to bring Europe to defend itself against Russia's imperialist appetite for power? ... To break the deadlock, the EU must urgently resort to radical measures, starting with the abolition of the unanimity principle, as proposed by António Costa, President of the European Council. After all, it is unacceptable that a small state like Hungary is able to gamble with the fate of 450 million citizens thanks to its veto.”
Open debate about Denmark's failings is welcome
The drone crisis has triggered a fierce debate about domestic policy in summit host Denmark. Berlingske calls for more objectivity:
“Mette Frederiksen was criticised for provoking a Russian reaction with her aggressive rhetoric and her massive support for Ukraine. People have the right to take and defend this stance, but it must be contradicted because it expresses the idea that the victim – Denmark – is to blame for the attack. This is reminiscent of the policy of appeasement before the Second World War broke out. If we keep our heads down and don't provoke the bully, it'll all be fine. But this is wrong both factually and in principle. However, an open debate about the failings in terms of Denmark's rearmament is to be welcomed.”
Von der Leyen seeking to increase her clout
Someone senses an opportunity here, La Repubblica speculates:
“'Under EU command'. This phrase, repeated on several occasions by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, has alarmed many EU member states, from France to Germany. At yesterday's special meeting of the European Council there was a major clash over the 'anti-drone wall', which has attracted a lot of criticism. Why? Because von der Leyen is making no secret of her determination to do all she can to push through this new defence system. ... For the Commission president, the Russian threat can be exploited to give her own mandate more weight and secure a function for the European executive which it officially cannot have.”