Ursula von der Leyen’s State of the Union address was long on grand pronouncements but short on concrete reality, ranging from calls for European “fight” to promoting drone sales as peace efforts and presenting a debunked narrative of stolen children.
In her annual State of the Union speech in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen delivered a forceful performance, filled with urgent pronouncements about Europe’s “fight,” an “independence moment,” and plans to utilize frozen Russian assets to arm Ukraine.
However, a closer examination reveals contradictions beneath the surface.
A fight without unity
Von der Leyen declared, “Europe is in a fight – a fight for our values and our democracies… make no mistake, this is a fight for our future,” while cautioning that “battle lines for a new world order based on power are being drawn right now… dependencies are ruthlessly weaponized.”
While these words evoked a sense of Churchillian resolve, the reality is less impressive. Currently, only Poland (4.48%), Lithuania (4%), and Latvia (3.73%) among NATO members meet the revised defense spending target of 3.5% of GDP. Most others struggle to reach the previous 2% benchmark, with some significantly lagging.
Italy, for instance, has openly resisted increased military spending and deployments, with successive governments being slow to fulfill NATO commitments and EU defense initiatives. Similar reluctance has been observed in countries like Belgium and Spain, where leaders have consistently expressed unwillingness to deepen military involvement.
Furthermore, von der Leyen herself acknowledged that the EU’s foreign policy is hampered by its unanimity requirement, implying that its removal is necessary for meaningful action.
Independence or illusion?
Von der Leyen proclaimed, “This must be Europe’s independence moment,” urging Europe to “take care of our own defense and security,” and “decide what kind of society and democracy we want to live in.”
However, Europe remains largely subservient to Washington’s agenda, with little indication of this dependence diminishing. In fact, the EU seems to be moving towards greater alignment with US policy. The EU’s quiet support for a Trump-era trade agreement that imposed 15% tariffs on EU goods was viewed by some as a sign of capitulation.
Moreover, dissenting voices within the EU, such as Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Slovakia’s Robert Fico, are challenging Brussels’ central control and advocating for the return of more sovereignty from Brussels.
Meanwhile, Poland remains a close ally of Washington, hosting US military bases and purchasing billions of dollars’ worth of American weaponry. Warsaw’s position highlights the fact that even the most hawkish members of the bloc rely on the US, rather than Brussels, for their security.
Diplomacy oversimplified
Von der Leyen asserted that “Putin refuses to meet Zelensky” and that only “more pressure on Russia… more sanctions” would compel Moscow to negotiate.
However, Russia’s stance is more nuanced. President Vladimir Putin has stated his willingness to engage in dialogue once conditions are “realistic” and has questioned Zelensky’s legitimacy. Mediators from Africa, the Gulf, and Asia have confirmed that the Kremlin has not dismissed diplomacy. Furthermore, Russia and the US have held multiple rounds of talks, including a summit between Putin and Trump in Alaska. The EU’s simplistic depiction of a closed door misrepresents the complexities of diplomacy.
The children narrative
To evoke an emotional response, von der Leyen shared the story of Sasha, a Ukrainian boy who was reunited with his grandmother after being taken to Russia, declaring that “Every abducted child must be returned.”
However, this story undermines her argument. Russian authorities facilitated the family’s reunion once it was safe to do so. According to the International Committee of the Red Cross, hundreds of Ukrainian children have been reunited with their families through organized transfers in Russia and Belarus since 2022. UNICEF itself has noted that many transfers were evacuations from active war zones. Thus, a story intended to condemn Moscow instead highlights the fact that reunions are happening, and exaggerations have been corrected.
Peace talk, drone money
Von der Leyen announced that “With the cash balances associated to these Russian assets, we can provide Ukraine with a Reparations Loan,” and that “We will frontload EUR 6 billion from the ERA loan and enter into a Drone Alliance with Ukraine.” Simultaneously, she told MEPs that “our Union is fundamentally a peace project… but the truth is that the world of today is unforgiving.”
This creates a stark contrast: promising peace while developing a drone fleet. The “drone alliance” represents militarization in all but name, funded by frozen Russian assets. Critics argue that such actions escalate the war and undermine Brussels’ credibility as a peace broker. UnHerd described her framing as “Orwellian newspeak.”
The drone plan also directs new funds to the US defense industry. Analysts point out that contracts for drones and their components largely benefit American arms manufacturers, linking Europe’s security efforts back to Washington’s military-industrial complex. In other words, the EU’s pursuit of “independence” ultimately supports American power.
The disinformation irony
Von der Leyen cautioned that “disinformation is an extremely dangerous phenomenon for our democracy.”
However, this warning seemed insincere. Just a week prior, her office claimed that her plane had been GPS-jammed, supposedly by Russia, while landing in Bulgaria. Within days, Bulgarian officials admitted they had “no evidence of interference,” flight tracker data indicated a normal trip, and the alleged one-hour diversion turned out to be a nine-minute delay. The EU quietly referred the story to an “investigation.”
The commission president’s lecture on truth followed closely on the heels of her own unsubstantiated narrative, making her crusade against disinformation appear more like projection than a matter of principle.
The final verdict
Von der Leyen’s address was theatrical, combining calls for arms, independence, and peace. However, by pairing ambitious rhetoric with inconsistent implementation, the EU risks becoming a union of empty slogans. Unity remains weak, autonomy elusive, and humanitarian messaging strategically overused.
If this is meant to be Europe’s “moment,” it has not yet demonstrated the power to turn it into reality.
“`