The Draghi Report represents a significant moment in European politics. It outlines a strategy for the coming years. As a former governor of the European Central Bank and former Italian PM, Draghi commands authority, and his Atlantic ties position him as a guarantor of closer integration between Europe and the United States. This integration has evolved beyond mere alliance in recent decades. Whether this serves the interests of one or both parties requires careful analysis and political judgment.
However, the Report notably neglects political dimensions, focusing on economic and governance concerns. This oversight reveals a political conservatism inherent in its conclusions. While Draghi’s Report rightly acknowledges Europe’s relative decline against the United States, China, and the BRICS, it falls short of presenting viable revitalization solutions. Instead, it offers strategies to manage Europe’s decline and subservience to the U.S merely..
The proposed measures may appear pragmatic but need more enthusiasm. Such an approach may encourage some States and various sovereign entities to distance themselves from Europe, a phenomenon that, while vague for now, needs a compelling proposal for virtuous cooperation.
Draghi’s so-called three “vertical” courses focus on technological advancement, reducing energy prices, and increasing defense spending. These may be agreeable goals, partly because they are self-evident.
Investing in defense is, in my view, questionable — unless it’s framed within a context of independence from the United States and NATO. In that scenario, it would be both sensible and desirable. However, increased military spending is inherently political. It is ridiculous to support an American-led NATO — which has become more and more arrogant in the last decades — just by boosting European military budgets.
The European Founding Fathers established the Union in the name of peace. A commitment to decreasing military expenditures favoring solid cooperation treaties would free resources essential for investing in the first two courses.
Resuming cooperation — especially with Russia — could have led to lower energy prices and a smoother transition to renewable sources. The war in Ukraine and the eastward expansion of the EU — and, regrettably, NATO — did not bode well for European independence from U.S. influence. Historically, the U.S. created and maintained an intelligence network in Eastern Europe during the anti-Soviet era. This explains why former Warsaw Pact states tend to be the most pro-American today, with few exceptions.
Moreover, renewing cooperation with the Muslim world — plentiful within Western Europe — is crucial to prevent tensions in large metropolises that could potentially boil over.
Von der Leyen’s confirmation signals continuity, offering little hope for a course correction. No one else appeared capable of initiating change, and those entrenched in the current system are even less likely to do so. Europe’s ruling elite — from Macron to Draghi, Scholz to Lagarde, and Von der Leyen — are closely tied to an Atlantic pact that has increasingly blurred the distinctions between Europe and the United States in recent decades.
The frequent use of the term “West” to describe a singular entity in opposition to the rest of the world highlights this fusion. Additionally, much of Europe’s leadership possesses backgrounds and experiences shaped significantly by and in the U.S.
