The European Union (EU) has taken a decisive step toward strengthening its defense capabilities. On March 6, 2025, during a special summit in Brussels, EU leaders announced an ambitious plan to allocate €800 billion for Europe’s rearmament. This substantial financial commitment raises a crucial question: where will the money come from?
The funding structure is divided into two main components. Approximately €650 billion will be sourced from new debts issued independently by each EU member state. The remaining €150 billion will be provided through credit assistance backed by the EU budget. Notably, this plan sidesteps the controversial option of issuing joint debt—commonly known as eurobonds—a measure that has long been a point of contention among EU nations.
A New Approach to Borrowing
One of the most striking policy shifts comes from Germany. Friedrich Merz, the leading candidate to become the next German Chancellor, has traditionally opposed increasing public debt. However, he now advocates for unlimited borrowing to finance military spending. Supporting this approach, Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, has proposed activating a “safeguard clause.” This mechanism would provide temporary flexibility within the Stability and Growth Pact, which ordinarily imposes strict limits on public debt and budget deficits.
Under the current framework, eurozone countries are required to keep public debt below 60% of GDP and budget deficits under 3%. Yet, several nations already exceed these thresholds. By invoking the safeguard clause, the EU aims to prevent punitive measures against countries accumulating additional debt for defense purposes.
Market Concerns and Interest Rate Risks
The financial markets’ response remains a key concern. Countries with stronger credit ratings, such as Germany, typically enjoy lower borrowing costs. In contrast, economically weaker states face higher interest rates, known as “spreads.” Rising spreads can restrict a country’s ability to invest in other vital sectors, including infrastructure, education, and social programs.
Jürgen Matthes, Head of International Economic Policy at the German Economic Institute (IW), warns that the long-term impact of increased defense debt on spreads is still uncertain. If borrowing costs rise significantly, financially vulnerable countries could experience added pressure, threatening broader economic stability within the eurozone.
The Debate Over Eurobonds
Despite the urgency of the situation, the idea of issuing eurobonds remains politically divisive. Countries such as Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, and Finland have consistently opposed the concept, arguing that it would unfairly transfer the fiscal burden of less disciplined economies to more prudent nations.
Additionally, EU law prohibits any member state from assuming the debt of another. Changing these legal frameworks would require a complex and time-consuming treaty revision process. Nonetheless, there is precedent for joint borrowing: during the COVID-19 pandemic, the EU issued €750 billion in collective debt under a limited liability structure, marking a historic first for the bloc.
Divergent Expert Opinions
Experts remain divided on whether joint debt is a viable solution for financing Europe’s defense ambitions. Jens Boysen-Hogrefe of the Kiel Institute for the World Economy argues that collective borrowing would be appropriate for shared military initiatives. In contrast, Clemens Fuest, President of the Ifo Institute in Munich, dismisses the possibility as impractical given the urgent need to enhance defense capabilities and the absence of a unified EU defense strategy.
As Europe embarks on this unprecedented rearmament effort, questions about financial sustainability and political cohesion persist. While the immediate focus is on strengthening defense, the long-term economic and legal ramifications of these decisions will continue to shape the EU’s future trajectory.
