In November 2025, the largest European network of civil society groups that works to promote European cooperation and integration, European Movement International, adopted the Copenhagen Declaration on European Strategic Autonomy and Sovereignty. It called upon the European Union (EU) and the member states to strengthen European capacity to act independently to defend European territory and interests. The threats to European sovereignty mentioned were ‘Russian aggression’, ‘China’s strategic pressure’ and some ‘actions and rhetoric from long-standing partners’, the last being a reference to Trump’s USA. Maintaining strategic autonomy and sovereignty, according to the Declaration, required strengthening collective decision-making, enhancing defence preparedness and reducing ‘critical dependencies’ by investing in ‘Europe’s capacity to secure the energy supplies, digital infrastructure, raw materials, critical medicines and key technologies, ensuring that no external actor can undermine European sovereignty.’
European Union policy documents and rhetoric in recent times show a sense of being in an existential crisis and the use of terms such as ‘sovereignty’, ‘strategic autonomy’, and ‘independence’ has become very frequent. The European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen in her 2025 State of the Union address declared that Europe was being forced to fight for its ‘place in a world in which many major powers are either ambivalent or openly hostile’ to it and where ‘dependencies are ruthlessly weaponised.’ She called it ‘Europe’s Independence Moment’ that requires Europe to develop capabilities to be able to defend itself and ‘to take control over technologies and energies’ that fuel its economies.
What is Strategic Autonomy?
Strategic Autonomy can be defined as the capability of a nation-state or a regional bloc like EU to make its own decisions independent from foreign pressure in key areas such as security, economy, technology, and geopolitics.
Although the term ‘strategic autonomy’ is only a few decades old, the idea of a nation maintaining and enhancing the scope for independent decisions and actions has been around since the late 1940s. It was the idea that motivated newly independent countries such as India to choose non-alignment over joining either of the two opposing camps during the Cold War. India’s pursuit of independent nuclear and space programmes and refusal to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty also stem from this need to maintain its ability to act autonomously.
In Europe, the same idea propelled the French President Charles de Gaulle’s (1959-1969) efforts to make France an independent global player and assert autonomy vis-à-vis the US. As a result, France withdrew from the US-led NATO’s integrated military command in 1966 to pursue an independent nuclear policy and also engaged with China and the USSR diplomatically on its own.
The first use of the term ‘strategic autonomy’ in an official document, it is believed, was in the French White Paper on Defence in June 1994. This White Paper stressed the need for France to remain strategically autonomous and maintain its ability to act independently of NATO in matters of national security. This was the time when the end of the Cold War had made the future role of NATO itself uncertain.
By late 1990s, however, the ethnic conflicts in the erstwhile Yugoslavia showed up the dependence of Europe on NATO even in its own backyard. This led to the Joint Declaration on European Defence (popularly called Saint Malo Declaration) signed by the British PM Tony Blair and the French President Jacques Chirac in December 1998. The Declaration stated that Europe must have capacity for ‘autonomous action’ independent from NATO to respond to international crisis. Essentially the Declaration helped reconcile the French advocacy of strategic autonomy with the British support for the NATO. Although none of the EU institutions were involved in it, it played an important role in shaping the subsequent EU policies.
The Lisbon Treaty 2009, a very important treaty that amended the EU foundational treaties, contained a clause on mutual defence and also provided for greater defence cooperation among the member states. It gave lesser significance to the NATO and the USA as compared to earlier such documents and, therefore, has been called an ‘ultralight’ blueprint for European strategic autonomy. In 2010, a European Parliament report for the first time mentioned the need for ‘strategic autonomy’ to maintain peace and protect European interests and values. Signalling a shift in perception, it spoke of NATO as an equal partner rather than as the pivotal institution responsible for European defence and advocated protectionist policies to strengthen the European military-industrial complex.
Europe’s role in the world: Two competing visions
It must be kept in mind that since the late 1940s, two rival visions of Europe’s place in the world have competed for dominance among the European policy elites. One was the idea of ‘Atlantic Europe’ that was premised on close collaboration with the USA in upholding the ‘rules-based liberal world order’ and free trade. The other was the concept of ‘Fortress Europe’ or a Europe that is relatively autonomous from the USA and is capable of independent action in defence and economic matters to protect its vital interests. The foremost champion of this framework has been France. The Atlantic vision relied heavily on NATO and American military capabilities for European defence and was advocated by countries like Britain, Germany, the Netherlands, etc. It was the dominant vision for most years since the end of Second World War barring some years during the late 1960s and 1970s when the global economic crisis pushed many European policymakers towards the ‘Fortress Europe’ thinking. Following the end of the Cold War and the rise of globalisation in the 1990s, it seemed that the vision of Atlantic Europe had decisively won. However, in the last decade and a half, the recurrent use of terms like ‘sovereignty’, ‘strategic autonomy’, ‘resilience’, etc. appears to signal a shift towards the ‘Fortress Europe’ thinking.
EU’s pursuit of Strategic Autonomy: Four Phases
It was in December 2013 that the term strategic autonomy was first used in an official European Commission document on defence. Since then, the term has occurred often in EU documents as well as political rhetoric although the meaning of the concept has kept evolving with time. One can understand this progression in terms of four phases:
The First Phase (2013-2016)
In this phase, the concept was used primarily in the context of security and defence related matters. The focus was on developing European military capabilities for independent action in times of geopolitical crisis. Particular emphasis was given to building an innovative and competitive defence technological and industrial base to enhance defence capabilities. However, many member states especially those that bordered Russia such as Estonia and Finland and those who favoured closer ties with the US looked at it with suspicion.
The Second Phase (2017-2019)
The concept got a boost as EU confronted numerous challenges such as the Brexit referendum, the growing competitiveness and assertiveness of China, and the ‘America-First’ policies and rhetoric of President Trump. It was increasingly felt that in a world increasingly defined by great power rivalry between the US and China, Europe must have operational capabilities to protect its geopolitical and economic interests on its own. The exit of Britain from the EU also spurred greater France-Germany military cooperation to equip the EU with credible military means to boost its strategic autonomy.
The Third Phase (2020-2022)
The COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns brought into open the dependence of European countries on Asia especially China for supply of many critical raw materials and products such as semiconductor chips, medicines and medical equipment, etc. Policymakers began to point to the need for Europe to develop geopolitical and economic resilience and sovereignty by reshoring production. New terms such as ‘open strategic autonomy’, ‘strategic sovereignty’, etc were coined.
The Fourth Phase (2022-Present)
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 brought a new sense of urgency to this debate as the EU worked to finance military aid to Ukraine and to phase out its dependency on Russian gas, oil, and coal. Given the Chinese backing of Russia, the need was also felt to reduce or diversify dependencies in critical raw materials, semiconductors, digital technologies, medical products, etc. By 2025, with the Ukrainian war still continuing and a more uncertain and unreliable Trump administration in the USA, the pursuit of strategic autonomy became even more critical. European strategic autonomy now came to cover all sectors from defence, economy, energy, trade, finance, digital technologies and infrastructure, critical supply chains, health, etc.
Conclusion
Thus, the European understanding of Strategic Autonomy has evolved over the last decade from primarily focused on reducing defence and crisis management dependency on the NATO to also reducing economic and supply chain vulnerabilities, enhancing energy security and more recently to strengthening European competitiveness and productivity. It involves now all sectors and policies and is framed also as ‘resilience’, ‘sovereignty’, and ‘independence’.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Ques: What is strategic autonomy?
Strategic Autonomy can be defined as the capability of a nation-state or a regional bloc like EU to make its own decisions independent from foreign pressure in key areas such as security, economy, technology, and geopolitics.
Ques: What is the Non-Proliferation Treaty?
The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is an international agreement that aims to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, promote the peaceful use of nuclear energy, and encourage nuclear disarmament. It was opened for signature in 1968 and entered into force in 1970.
Ques: What are critical materials?
Critical materials are raw materials that are essential for economic development, national security, and advanced technologies but face risks of supply disruption. Examples include rare earth elements, lithium, cobalt, gallium, and graphite, which are widely used in electronics, renewable energy systems, semiconductors, and electric vehicles.
Leave a Reply