A world in transition: keys to defence and security
Faced with growing threats from autocratic regimes, the erosion of democratic values, the rise of populism and the emergence of new forms of conflict – such as digital warfare, disinformation and the military use of artificial intelligence – Europe is facing the urgent challenge of redefining its security model. In this context, strengthening strategic autonomy and adapting defence to a changing global environment is an unavoidable priority.
To address these issues, the second day of the 37th Defence and Security Seminar, organised by the Association of European Journalists (APE), was held. Against a global backdrop marked by uncertainty, technological change and new threats, the event brought together leading national and international experts to discuss, through three thematic panels, the essential role of defence in a constantly changing world. Throughout the sessions, the need to adapt to this strategic mobility and the importance of maintaining a clear vision of Europe's role, technological innovation and the fight against disinformation were emphasised.
- The defence of Europe in a world that challenges the West
- Foreign policy and defence as a solution
- Risks to defence investment
- Space
- The role of AI
- A new era: cognitive dominance and a ‘multidomain operations’ plan
The seminar was structured in three main blocks. The first, entitled ‘NATO: basic values, European pillar and a look to the SOUTH’, featured Margaritis Schinas, former Vice-President of the European Commission, María Dolores de Cospedal, former Minister of Defence, Pascal Boniface, Director of the IRIS Institute in France, moderated by journalist Araceli Infante. The second panel focused on ‘Artificial intelligence and new combat spaces’, with contributions from experts such as David Ramírez Morán, representative of the IEEE, Javier Izquierdo, head of Hispasat, and Brigadier General Carlos Javier Frías, moderated by Juan José Fernández, journalist at El Periódico. Finally, the last debate was held under the title ‘Challenges for defence in the age of disinformation’, with the participation of Major General Fernando Morón Ruíz and a closing statement by Diego Carcedo and Miguel Ángel Aguilar, president and secretary general of the APE, respectively.
The defence of Europe in a world that challenges the West
Since the NATO summit in The Hague, where heads of state and government agreed to move towards defence spending of 5% of GDP over the next decade, a crucial debate has reopened on the strategic role of defence in the West. This commitment, strongly promoted by the United States, although not new or exclusive to the Trump administration, responds to a profound transformation of the international order.
We live in a world where the major powers increasingly act according to a transactional logic, guided by self-interest and the belief that only the strongest survive. As Hobbes warned in Leviathan, we are facing a ‘war of all against all’, where power prevails over rules. Meanwhile, Europe has remained anchored in its defence of multilateralism, diplomacy and the rule of law, even when many actors openly operate through the use of hard power, without concern for legitimacy or consensus.
Especially since the outbreak of war in Ukraine, we have awakened from the naive idea that large-scale armed conflicts would never happen again in Europe. This war has shaken the collective consciousness of the continent and created a new sense of urgency.
Today, Europe and the West face a double threat: one external and one internal. On the one hand, authoritarian regimes openly challenge our values and seek to impose alternative models based on control, censorship and force. On the other hand, internal disunity is growing: political fragmentation, citizen scepticism, disinformation and the lack of a common voice. This internal weakening has left a vacuum, especially in the so-called ‘global South,’ which those same autocratic actors are exploiting to gain influence.
Foreign policy and defence as a solution
According to former European Commission Vice-President Margaritis Schinas, to face this changing environment, Europe needs to correct its foreign policy and lack of a unified diplomatic voice.
The problem is not the people, but the fact that European foreign policy does not exist as such because it is paralysed by the veto system: any member state can block a common position, which makes us look weak and unserious to the world. A clear example is that three different resolutions on the Middle East have been voted on at the United Nations, something unthinkable in a coherent foreign policy.
As warned by the director of the Institute for International and Strategic Relations, Pascal Boniface, our silence on key conflicts is dangerous: we are criticised for not acting, and our supposed moral and strategic authority is called into question. We have asked Israel to stop certain actions, but we have done nothing about it, which makes our position look ridiculous.
The second major area where Europe needs to improve, according to Schinas, and possibly the most important, is defence. Fortunately, there is a growing consensus among heads of state and government: it is time to act, because we cannot always count on an external shield to protect us. All this must be done within the framework of NATO, but in a more coordinated, coherent and operationally autonomous manner. As the Minister of Defence stated, we Europeans have built ‘a political project that is unparalleled anywhere in the world’. Through defence, we seek not only border security, but also the protection of a way of life based on good governance and values that emerged after the Second World War and which must continue to prevail.
Risks to defence investment
A key macroeconomic opportunity is opening up for European countries: the possibility that part of defence spending will not count as public deficit. This would allow states to invest more in their military capabilities without breaching the European Union's strict fiscal rules. However, this flexibility must be used responsibly. Turning this fiscal leeway into inefficient spending or spending that fuels inflation would be a serious mistake. The European Central Bank will only tolerate this exception if it translates into a real improvement in European defence capabilities, not into waste or improvised policies.
On the other hand, there are populist forces, both on the far right and the far left, that oppose this European defence, as we have seen in France and Spain. Populism tends to prioritise short-term policies with high popular impact, such as subsidies or wage increases, over long-term strategic investments, putting military modernisation or technological development in defence at risk.
Space
In recent years, the use of space – particularly communications and satellite systems – has become a key element of modern defence and warfare. Although this is not entirely new, interest has now grown, especially in Europe. For example, Spain already has a company specialising in the development of military satellites, which provide the Ministry of Defence with secure communications and strategic observation, especially on missions abroad.
In this new scenario, Europe is seeking to gain strategic sovereignty in the space sector and reduce its dependence on powers such as the United States. This autonomy means being able to operate its own systems in the event that, for example, an ally such as the US decides to cut off access to certain technologies (as has happened with Ukraine and Starlink).
The European IRIS² programme was mentioned, an initiative that aims to create a constellation of European satellites. It is not in direct competition with Starlink (the SpaceX system), but it does seek to create a secure and autonomous communications layer in Europe, with both civil and military applications.
In addition, it was emphasised that the European space industry must collaborate between countries, as no single country can develop a complete system on its own. Even the United States acts as a customer or partner in some respects, demonstrating that technological interdependence is inevitable but must be managed with balance.
The role of AI
Until recently, in most of the world's armies, AI was more of a promise than a concrete reality. However, the war in Ukraine marked a significant change. Although the Russian army was expected to be more advanced in terms of technology, it was Ukraine that managed to creatively apply commercial AI tools to the battlefield. A notable example is how apps that were previously used by citizens to report infrastructure damage (such as broken streetlights or potholes) to local councils were adapted so that civilians could report the location of enemy troops or equipment. This demonstrates the power of ‘dual-use technology,’ where common tools were transformed into strategic resources in a real conflict.
In practical terms, AI currently offers two main types of application in the military sphere: predictive and cognitive intelligence. The first, and most developed, analyses huge volumes of data to identify statistically significant patterns, greatly improving the efficiency of military intelligence. In the past, the problem was a lack of information—armies devoted considerable effort to locating the enemy. Today, with hundreds of thousands of sensors deployed on the battlefield, the real challenge is to organise all that information, select what is truly useful and do so in real time, which is why predictive AI is becoming essential.
A new era: cognitive dominance and a ‘multidomain operations’ plan
In the current context, Western armies face a clear disadvantage: they are bound by traditional rules of conflict that no longer reflect reality. While our democracies require formal declarations, protocols and justifications for action, other actors operate in what is known as the ‘grey zone’, an ambiguous space between peace and war. This is where hybrid strategies are deployed, combining conventional military tactics with unconventional tools such as disinformation, social media, cyberattacks and the use of unidentifiable actors, such as the famous ‘little green men’ in Crimea.
To address these challenges, both Europe and NATO are moving towards the concept of ‘multidomain operations,’ as commented by Major General Fernando Luis Morón Ruiz. The five areas of confrontation are integrated: land, sea, air, cyberspace and the cognitive domain. The latter symbolises a critical development: war is no longer fought only with weapons, but also in the human mind, where attempts are made to influence, manipulate or destabilise the adversary through a synchronised combination of instruments of power. In the face of this cognitive warfare, one of NATO's key objectives is to strengthen psychological resilience - to foster self-control, emotional stability, trust in democratic values and the capacity for independent judgement. This resilience is essential to maintaining social and military cohesion in the face of the invisible but devastating attacks of the hybrid era. In this regard, media literacy emerges as an indispensable tool for defending against manipulation and preserving an informed and critical citizenry.