Critics of the push for rapid defense decoupling warn that Europe is underestimating the immense difficulty and cost of replacing American military power. The U.S. provides critical 'enablers'—such as strategic airlift, air refueling, and advanced intelligence—that Europe currently lacks the capacity to replicate. Attempting to build these capabilities from scratch will take years, if not decades, and could leave the continent dangerously exposed in the interim. There is a significant risk that by prioritizing local contractors and excluding U.S. firms from defense funds, Europe may end up with less effective, more expensive equipment.
There is also the concern that a move toward 'Europeanization' could lead to a fragmented security architecture. If individual nations or the EU attempt to build redundant command structures or competing procurement systems, it could undermine the interoperability that has been the hallmark of NATO's success. The reality is that the U.S. defense industrial base is deeply integrated with Europe's, and severing these ties could weaken the collective technological edge that the West holds over adversaries. Furthermore, the financial burden of this transition is staggering, potentially diverting funds from other critical sectors like infrastructure, education, or social services.
Finally, some analysts fear that the rhetoric of 'strategic autonomy' may inadvertently encourage further U.S. disengagement. By signaling that Europe is ready to go it alone, European leaders might provide the political cover for isolationist factions in the U.S. to withdraw support even faster than the continent can adapt. This creates a dangerous race against time where the security gap could widen before European capabilities are fully realized, ultimately emboldening those who wish to challenge the status quo in Europe.