Eirini Kavarnou, Hellenic Open University - Postgraduate Student, std535038@ac.eap.gr

Evangelos Manouvelos, Hellenic Open University - Collaborating Teaching Staff, manouvelos.evangelos@ac.eap.gr

Summary:

The present thesis explores the European Union’s (EU) strategic challenge in enhancing its defence autonomy and reducing reliance on the United States. Through the systematic application of risk management theory and scenario-based analysis, the study examines the potential evolution of the ReArm Europe program by 2030.

Using the PESTEL methodology, risks are categorized as political, economic, social, technological, environmental, and legal. Critical threats identified include geopolitical instability, institutional asymmetry, U.S. dependency, and public scepticism.

The thesis presents three alternative scenarios for the program’s development:

1. Optimistic Scenario: The EU achieves military integration, establishes a European army, and creates a unified defence industry, significantly reducing its dependence on the U.S. This results in greater social cohesion and technological innovation. Risk management strategies include risk acceptance with safeguards, strategic narrative building, and achieving technological sovereignty.
2. Adverse Scenario: The program fails due to institutional incoherence and uneven funding, leading to competing national strategies. The EU appears fragmented, and public support declines. Strategic responses focus on risk avoidance and risk transfer, adaptive governance, and institutional counterbalances to address divergences and maintain cohesion.
3. Extreme Adverse Scenario: The ReArm Europe project collapses entirely, and the EU fails to deter or respond to an attack on a member state, triggering a systemic crisis of trust, institutional destabilization, and geopolitical irrelevance. Proposed solutions include a radical redesign of EU institutions and the formation of a "core security community" led by states with strategic capacity.

The core argument of the thesis is that crises, when addressed with strategic foresight and institutional preparedness, can become catalysts for European integration and reform. Risk management must go beyond bureaucratic procedures to serve a political vision of sovereignty, democratic resilience, and global presence for the EU in the 21st century.

In essence, ReArm Europe represents not just a technological and political initiative, but an existential test for the future of European integration. The scenarios presented show that risk is neither static nor inherently destructive; rather, it can be leveraged as a strategic tool for enhancing European autonomy—provided it is met with collective responsibility, institutional readiness, and political will. In a global context where the U.S. withdrawal from European security commitments is increasingly realistic, and deterrence can no longer rely on external actors, the EU must assume an active geopolitical role. The success or failure of ReArm Europe will be a crucial indicator of whether the Union can maintain its strategic autonomy or regress into a state of defensive dependence and institutional fragility. Thus, risk management emerges not merely as a technical process, but as a fundamental political act with existential significance for the European project.

JEL classification codes:

D81 – Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

F50 – International Relations and International Political Economy: General

F52 – National Security; Economic Nationalism

F15 – Economic Integration

H56 – National Security and War

H11 – Structure, Scope, and Performance of Government