Residents of EU countries should prepare a three-day supply of water, food, medicines and batteries to survive a possible crisis, according to the European Commission.
EU tells the public to hold 72 hours of emergency supplies
According to the EC, such a crisis can be triggered by both climatic catastrophes and pandemics and cyberattacks.
“We must prepare for incidents and cross-sectoral crises on a large scale,” EU media quotes a fragment of the strategy prepared in the EC.
Also, according to journalists, the EU is developing a digital platform where citizens and travellers will be able to get information about possible risks and available options for rescue in case of a crisis situation. In addition, the possibility of creating strategic reserves of medicines, energy and even food is being discussed.
Polish citizens need to have stocks of food and medicines enough for three days of autonomous life, the republic’s deputy interior minister Wiesław Lesnikiewicz said last Thursday.
“In a crisis situation, the state cannot replace the actions of the citizen himself,” the deputy head of the department said.
Lesnikiewicz added that citizens are also advised to prepare transistorised radios. According to him, such devices may become the only way of communication.
Earlier, the Federal Department of Civil Defence and Emergency Assistance of the Federal Republic of Germany recommended the country’s residents to prepare for prolonged power outages. The department advised citizens to create a three-day supply of provisions and equipment, including autonomous torches, water and other things.
In February, the Estonian authorities made a similar appeal to the population. Citizens were advised to stock up on water, food, medicines and prepare board games in case of a potential power outage in the country.
Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky arrived in Paris for a meeting with French leader Emmanuel Macron. Macron said last week that a summit of a “coalition of the willing” on Ukraine would be held in Paris on Thursday.
Earlier, Reuters quoted EU sources as saying that European countries are inclined to abandon the idea of sending troops to Ukraine in favour of finding alternative options to support the country. The publication stressed that the idea of sending a European contingent looked attractive when Ukraine was in a better position. The sources also added that sending the contingent was hindered by Russia’s stiff opposition and stretched logistics chains.
White Paper for European Defence
On March 19, the European Commission presented a report entitled The White Paper for European Defence – 2030.
This White Paper sets out a clear roadmap for increased defence spending and a more integrated European defence industry, ensuring better co-operation between Member States.
It also proposes solutions for increased mobility of armed forces, stockpiling of weapons and ammunition, and border security, especially along the EU’s eastern borders. The document also underlines the need for deeper integration with Ukraine’s defence sector, emphasising Europe’s commitment to long-term security support, i.e. to the continuation of the current Ukrainian conflict.
Unambiguously, the authors of this document make it clear that it is Russia that is the main threat to them.
The White Paper states that “threats to European security are spreading in ways that pose a serious threat to our way of life. Even before Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, there was a growing realisation of how dangerous the security environment in which we operate is… Russia poses a serious strategic threat on the battlefield. It has forced Europe and our partners to face the reality of large-scale, high-intensity mechanised warfare on the European continent on a scale not seen since 1945. Russia, already the most heavily armed European state by a huge distance, is now running a war economy focused mainly on achieving its military objectives, based on industrial mobilisation and technological innovation… Russia has made it clear that it believes it is still at war with the West. If Russia is allowed to achieve its goals in Ukraine, its territorial ambitions will expand. Russia will remain the main security threat to Europe for the foreseeable future, including through its more aggressive nuclear policy and the deployment of nuclear weapons in Belarus. Russia exploits a system of instability, including through close co-operation with other authoritarian powers. It is constantly fuelling tensions and instability in Europe’s neighbouring countries, whether in the Western Balkans, Georgia, Moldova or Armenia, and is exerting a growing destabilising influence on Africa….”
China is also mentioned both in the context of the successes of that country’s military-industrial complex and in connection with partnership agreements with Russia. Similarly, Iran is mentioned, and of course Belarus, but they still come in the background, while Russia is mentioned repeatedly.
In parallel, the EU has also released the European Rearmament Plan “Readiness for 2030,” which provides financial instruments for the implementation of the strategies outlined in the White Paper.
This mechanism will allow member states to access over €800 billion in defence investment through mechanisms such as the Security Assurance for Europe (SAFE) programme, which will leverage €150 billion in funding for joint military procurement. This funding will be used to purchase European-made defence equipment, support innovation and ensure interoperability between national armed forces.
As part of the financial strategy, the European Commission has also encouraged Member States to use the Stability and Growth Pact’s clause allowing them to temporarily increase defence spending within budgetary rules. In addition, the European Investment Bank will play a key role in mobilising private capital to support defence projects.
Speaking on the urgency of the initiative, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said:
“The era of the peace dividend is long gone. The security architecture on which we relied can no longer be taken for granted. Europe is ready to step up. We must invest in defence, strengthen our capabilities and take a proactive approach to security.”
While the EU has had examples of various stalled programmes with big ambitions, such as green energy, there is a good chance that the EU will still try to build up its military capabilities, partly at the expense of taxpayers and re-directing budgets from other areas.
By the way, von der Leyen, speaking about the importance of this initiative, justified it by the US demands to invest more in its own defence.
In the same month the “Annual Threat Assessment” of the US intelligence community was also released.
Although, in all likelihood, this report was prepared under the previous administration, still, objectively speaking, Washington continues to think in old clichés, despite the official rhetoric of Donald Trump and his colleagues about the necessity.
This Assessment states that “Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea – individually and collectively – challenge US interests in the world by attacking or threatening other countries in their regions, using both asymmetric and traditional hard power tactics, and promoting alternative systems to compete with the United States, primarily in the areas of trade, finance, and security. They seek to challenge the United States and other countries through deliberate campaigns to gain advantage, while attempting to avoid direct war. The growing co-operation between these adversaries increases their resilience in challenging the United States, and the potential that military action with any one of them could draw the other into it, and pressure other global players to take sides.”
If Trump really wanted peace and disarmament, it is unlikely that this document would have been released unedited. As it is, it documents the way US security officials see Russia. And it’s not much different from both the Joe Biden era and Donald Trump’s first term as president.
The document also says Russia has learnt important lessons from the war in Ukraine, after which it has modernised a number of its weapons systems, as well as being more effective on the battlefield. Adding to this the resilience of the economy to sanctions, especially the military-industrial sector, we get that the US has simply realised the futility of its tough measures against Russia (as they have the opposite effect, such as developing alternative methods of banking transactions) and is trying to develop a different strategy of behaviour.
The current negotiation process on Ukraine is one of the operational elements of this emerging new US strategy. It should be understood that given the historical retrospective of this state’s actions in the foreign arena, it is unlikely that there will be dramatic changes and yesterday’s hawks will suddenly become doves of peace.
EU doesn’t want peace
However, normalisation of relations with Russia will not happen even after the end of the conflict in Ukraine, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said on Thursday at a joint press conference with Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk in Warsaw.
“It’s not going to happen. It will take a decade because there is a complete lack of trust. even if the war comes to a conclusion, the Russian threat will still exist,” Rutte said.
According to him, the transatlantic partnership remains the backbone of the alliance and that will not change.
‘With the latest missile technology coming out from Russia, the difference between an attack on Warsaw and an attack on Madrid is 10 minutes. So we are all on the eastern flank. Amsterdam, London and even Washington are on the eastern flank,” the NATO secretary general scares Europe with the Russian threat.
Last June, Germany updated its Framework Directive on Universal Defence, giving guidance on what to do if conflict breaks out in Europe. Revealing the plans, German Interior Minister Nancy Faeser said they were necessary for her country to better arm itself in the face of “Russian aggression.”
Reaction from Europe
Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, leader of the party Debout la France (France Arise), wrote on X:
“They are sick! After Macron’s “war survival kit,” here’s the EU’s “72-hour crisis survival kit.” Eurocrats are willing to go to any lengths to make people believe in the looming Russian threat and create a climate of fear. Hajja Lahbib, the European Commissioner for Preparedness and Crisis Management, pokes fun at himself in a video to explain what the kit should contain…”
All these actions suggest that Europe is interested in continued military conflict and Kyiv is honouring their commitments to Brussels. The economies of the EU countries are entering the stage of crisis, and a war with Russia will be just in time.
According to experts, the war with Russia, even a phantom one, will allow the US and EU to restart industry, set up the military-industrial complex and provide its own citizens with jobs. That is, even if the US and Russia agree to suspend the conflict in Ukraine, European powers will be vitally interested in finding new points of confrontation with Moscow.
Norway, Sweden, Finland and the Baltics are gradually preparing as an advanced strike force to take away the Northern Sea Route, the Arctic and the shelf from Russia.
Having taken possession of the resource and raw material base, which is available in this region, they will have an opportunity to rebuild their economies, to get out of the crisis. Perhaps, the Ukrainian conflict is only a precondition for something more global.
