The European Union: Is it Really a "Sleeping Giant"?
The European Union: Is it Really a "Sleeping Giant"?
What Does "Sleeping Giant" Even Mean Anyway?
You hear the term "sleeping giant" thrown around a lot in world politics. Basically, it points to a country or group that's got heaps of potential power – maybe economic muscle, loads of people, military might, or political clout – but isn't really using it on the world stage. They seem quiet, maybe too focused on their own stuff, but everyone knows they could shake things up big time if they ever "woke up," usually because of some big shock, internal change, or a new way of thinking about their place in the world. It suggests they could do a lot more than they currently are.
Think about past examples. Some say Napoleon worried about China "waking up". Others point to the U.S. before it jumped into World War II. The idea is the same: a powerhouse whose current actions don't match its future potential. But is this "sleep" a choice, a result of being stuck, or just a phase?
Why Call the EU a "Sleeping Giant"?
The European Union often gets tagged with this label. It seems weird, right? The EU is massive economically – the biggest single market, a huge player in global trade. It has a large population and sets rules that companies worldwide follow (that's the "Brussels Effect"). But despite all this, the EU often feels like it's pulling its punches in international diplomacy, especially when it comes to defense and security.
This wasn't always the vibe. After the Cold War, there was real hope the EU would become a major global power. But things like the failed European Constitution, the 2008 financial crash making countries look inward, Brexit, and a general lack of a clear shared goal beyond just peace and money have dampened those hopes and fed this "sleeping giant" idea.
Interestingly, academics use the term too, sometimes talking about how EU issues didn't matter much in national elections until crises like the Eurozone mess made people pay attention. If the EU is "asleep" internally, without strong public backing or agreement on where it's headed, it's naturally going to struggle to act boldly on the world stage. People also talk about it in specific areas, like whether the EU is using its full potential in environmental policy or defense.
The EU's Hidden Strengths: The Foundations of Power
Despite talk of underperformance, the EU has some serious assets.
Economic Powerhouse: The EU's single market is its crown jewel. Goods, services, money, and people move freely across most of the continent, driving growth and setting standards. It's the world's biggest trading bloc, a top exporter, and the main import market for over 100 countries. Its combined economic size puts it in the same league as the US and China, dwarfing others like Russia. It also carries weight in global trade bodies like the WTO.
Rule-Maker Supreme (The "Brussels Effect"): Maybe the EU's most unique strength is setting global standards. Because its market is so huge and attractive, international companies often adopt strict EU rules (on consumer safety, environment, data privacy, digital tech, etc.) everywhere, not just in Europe. Think about the GDPR data privacy law – it sparked similar laws globally. New rules like the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and Digital Services Act (DSA) might do the same. This power often reflects European values like democracy and human rights. But it's not all-powerful; it works better in some areas than others, faces competition from US and Chinese models, and can sometimes be seen as stifling innovation or burdening business. How the new digital rules play out globally is a big test.
Diplomacy and Soft Power: The EU has a vast diplomatic network through its External Action Service (EEAS). It's involved in many international organizations and plays a role in resolving conflicts and promoting democracy and human rights, like its work in the Western Balkans. The EU and its members are also the world's biggest donors of development and humanitarian aid. Add cultural initiatives and a strong belief in multilateralism (solving problems through negotiation, not force), and you get significant "soft power".
Waking Up to Economic Statecraft: Lately, facing a tougher world with big power rivalries, the EU is starting to use its economic tools more strategically for political goals. This is a shift from just focusing on trade. We're seeing things like:
EU-wide screening of foreign investments.
Rules to counter unfair foreign subsidies.
An Anti-Coercion Instrument (ACI) to hit back if other countries use economic pressure against the EU.
Much heavier use of sanctions, especially against Russia. These tools are part of a push for "strategic autonomy" – being less vulnerable and able to act independently. It's early days, but it shows the EU is thinking more geopolitically about its economic clout.
What Holds the EU Back? Why the Giant Might Seem "Asleep"
Despite its strengths, many things stop the EU from consistently flexing its muscles globally.
Internal Squabbles: A big issue is that the EU is 27 different countries, each with its own interests, history, and view of the world. Getting everyone to agree, especially on tricky foreign policy or security issues (like how to deal with Russia or China), is tough. This isn't helped by the rise of nationalist and Eurosceptic voices within member states who often question the whole EU project and block decisions. Splits between north and south on economic issues, or worries about who pays for what, also cause friction. If the EU can't agree internally, it's hard to act decisively externally. The complex institutions are often just a symptom of needing to compromise between all these different views.
Mazes of Bureaucracy: The EU's decision-making is famously complicated. Power is split between Brussels and national capitals differently depending on the issue. A major hurdle, especially for foreign and security policy (CFSP), is that most big decisions need everyone to agree (unanimity). This gives every country a veto and often leads to delays, weak compromises, or nothing happening at all. Trying to use majority voting more often faces resistance. The system can also feel bureaucratic and distant from ordinary people. It's a constant balancing act between being inclusive (hearing everyone), effective (acting fast), and simple (being understandable). Historically, inclusivity often won out, leading to complex processes that slow things down.
Foreign Policy Struggles: The EU finds it hard to have a single, strong foreign policy voice that matches its economic weight. Even with structures like the High Representative (HR/VP) and the EEAS, action often seems reactive, just dealing with problems as they pop up rather than following a long-term plan. The EU has often looked divided or ineffective during major crises, struggles to anticipate problems, and is held back by that unanimity rule and the tendency for big member states to handle sensitive stuff themselves. There's also a lack of a clear, inspiring vision for the EU's global role beyond just peace and prosperity.
The Defense Dilemma: Security and defense is where the EU's limits really show. For decades, Europe relied heavily on the US and NATO for security. While that brought stability, it arguably meant EU countries didn't feel the need to build up their own strong defenses. European defense is plagued by fragmentation. Countries spend a lot collectively, but having dozens of different national systems means huge waste, duplication, and forces that can't easily work together. Europe has far more types of weapons systems than the US, for example. Equipment is often poorly maintained, and there are serious gaps in key areas like refueling planes, transport aircraft, and intelligence gathering. Defense spending has shot up since Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine, but just spending more won't fix the underlying problems without much deeper cooperation. Getting that cooperation is hard because countries have different views on threats, different military cultures, and are reluctant to rely on others for vital defense functions. Plus, the US has sometimes been wary of an independent European defense effort potentially weakening NATO.
Economic Weak Spots: While strong overall, the EU economy has vulnerabilities. It depends heavily on others for vital resources – historically Russian gas, and increasingly, critical raw materials (often from China) needed for green and digital tech, plus advanced computer chips from Taiwan and South Korea. There are also worries about European industry keeping up with global rivals, facing challenges like high energy costs and the demands of the green transition. Some analyses suggest the EU hasn't been as quick as the US or Japan to reduce its economic reliance on China, potentially increasing its risks.
Finding a Story and Leaders: The EU also struggles with its basic narrative. The original story – guaranteeing peace and prosperity after devastating wars – doesn't resonate as strongly today, especially with younger people. Finding a compelling new story for the 21st century hasn't quite happened yet. Leadership is also often criticized for lacking vision or being too cautious, and projecting a single, clear voice is difficult with competing EU roles and prominent national leaders.
How the "Sleeping Giant" Idea Plays Out in Practice
Let's look at specific areas where the gap between the EU's potential and its actual performance seems widest.
Foreign Policy - A Hesitant Player? The EU often comes across as a "civilian power" – good with rules and economic tools, less comfortable with traditional power politics and security. Its actions are often hampered by the internal divisions, the need for unanimous agreement, institutional complexity, and the difficulty of dealing with messy international crises. While it can act decisively (like the strong sanctions on Russia or its role in the Iran nuclear deal ), its record is patchy. It's often criticized for being ineffective in crises close to home. There's a constant tension between EU-level leaders and powerful member states, which stops the EU from truly speaking with one voice. This gap between what people expect the EU to do (given its size and power) and what it actually does feeds the "sleeping giant" critique.
Defense - Chasing "Strategic Autonomy": The buzzword in EU defense is "strategic autonomy" – the ambition to act independently, especially in security, reducing reliance on the US and NATO. This idea has gained steam due to doubts about the US commitment and the worsening security situation, especially the war in Ukraine. Several initiatives support this:
Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP): The framework for EU military and civilian missions abroad (over 37 since 2003, like the recent Red Sea operation). However, enthusiasm for these missions might be fading, and they face challenges.
Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO): Allows smaller groups of willing countries to cooperate more deeply on specific defense projects (62 projects reported advancing in 2024). Aims to reduce fragmentation, but its real impact is still unfolding. Countries are investing but lagging on research spending targets.
European Defence Fund (EDF): Uses the EU budget to co-fund joint defense research and development, aiming to boost innovation and cooperation. A big step, but challenges remain in using funds effectively.
Strategic Compass: Adopted just after the Ukraine invasion, this is the EU's current defense strategy document. It acknowledges the return of major war and aims to make the EU a more capable security actor by focusing on acting fast, securing key areas (like cyber), investing, and partnering.
Increased Defense Spending: The Ukraine war triggered huge spending hikes across Europe. Combined EU member state spending was projected near 1.9% of GDP in 2024, up over 30% from 2021, with calls for even more.
European Sky Shield Initiative (ESSI): A German-led plan for a European air/missile defense system, mostly using existing US/Israeli tech. It's controversial, especially with France, highlighting debates about relying on others versus building European solutions. These are real steps. But the old problems – fragmentation, differing views, sovereignty concerns, capability gaps – haven't disappeared. It's unclear if this is a fundamental shift or just patching things up.
Economic Clout - Beyond Just Trade: The EU is trying to use its economic power more strategically. Key efforts include:
Global Gateway: The EU's big plan (launched 2021) to fund infrastructure projects worldwide (aiming for €300 billion by 2027). It's pitched as a "values-based" alternative to China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), focusing on sustainable digital, energy, and transport links. Compared to BRI, Global Gateway emphasizes high standards but is seen as slower and more bureaucratic. Its funding relies on mixing public and private money, and its focus has been questioned. Partner countries sometimes find its standards demanding.
Economic Statecraft Tools: Beyond big projects, the EU is using specific tools:
Sanctions: Used much more actively, especially against Russia. Their effectiveness is debated, depending on coordination and managing side-effects.
Anti-Coercion Instrument (ACI): Allows the EU to retaliate (e.g., with tariffs) if a third country uses economic pressure to bully the EU or a member state. Not used yet, but its existence sends a signal. Needs political unity to work.
Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM): Mainly an environmental tool (taxing carbon-intensive imports), but it has geopolitical implications, aiming to protect EU industry but risking trade disputes. This shift towards using economic power politically offers new influence but also risks backfiring if not handled carefully, potentially undermining the global trading system the EU usually champions.
Technology - Rules vs. Innovation: The EU is a global leader in regulating technology (GDPR, DMA, DSA, AI Act). These rules shape global corporate behavior (the "Brussels Effect"). But critics worry this heavy regulation might stifle innovation and investment. Enforcing these rules against giant tech firms is a major challenge. In other tech areas:
Green Tech: The EU is pushing renewables hard, but heavily depends on China for things like solar panels and batteries. European companies struggle to compete, and the EU seems slow to diversify its suppliers compared to the US/Japan.
Semiconductors: Realizing their strategic importance, the EU launched a "Chips Act" to boost local production, similar to the US effort. Both are trying to reduce dependence on East Asia (especially Taiwan) for the most advanced chips. It's a long, expensive road. The EU faces a tricky balancing act: setting global rules without killing local innovation, while also trying to reduce risky dependencies on others for critical technologies.
The EU Compared: Standing Next to the Giants
How does the EU look when placed alongside the US and China?
EU vs. US - Friends, Rivals, or Both? The US-EU relationship is deep but complicated.
Security: NATO and the US security guarantee have been vital for Europe for decades. But doubts about US reliability have fueled the EU's push for more self-reliance. Still, the US military is vastly more powerful, and Washington has sometimes been wary of separate EU defense efforts.
Economy & Rules: They are economic peers and huge trade partners, but also competitors. Trade spats pop up, and they compete in tech, with different approaches to industrial policy (like their respective Chips Acts or the US Inflation Reduction Act's impact). The EU's heavy regulation contrasts with the US's often lighter touch, especially in digital areas. Despite friction, they recognize the need to cooperate, especially regarding challenges from China.
EU vs. China - Partner, Competitor, and Rival: The EU officially sees China as all three at once.
Economy: China is a huge market and supply chain hub for the EU, but this interdependence comes with worries about unfair practices, market access, and subsidies. The EU's reliance on Chinese imports, especially for clean tech, has grown. Initiatives like Global Gateway are direct responses to China's BRI.
Security & Values: China's military growth, actions in the South China Sea, and challenge to the global order worry the EU, aligning it somewhat with the US. But the EU is often more cautious due to its economic ties. Fundamental differences in political systems fuel a "systemic rivalry".
Technology: The EU is in a tech race with both the US and China in areas like AI and chips. EU regulations directly affect Chinese tech firms in Europe.
Military: China's military is growing fast but still lags the US overall. However, it clearly outmatches the EU's current fragmented capabilities.
In short, the EU lacks the unified military punch of the US or China. Its power lies more in its economy and rule-setting. It's stuck in a tough spot: relying on an unpredictable US for security while deeply linked economically to a China it sees as a rival. This often paralyzes the EU when it needs to make hard choices.
Is the Giant Stirring?
Have recent crises finally jolted the EU into action?
Crises as Wake-Up Calls: Big shocks often push Europe together.
COVID-19: Showed supply chain weaknesses and led to unprecedented joint borrowing for the NextGenerationEU recovery fund. Some saw it as restarting integration.
War in Ukraine: A massive geopolitical shock. It triggered surprisingly unified and strong sanctions on Russia, huge aid for Ukraine, and a dramatic surge in defense spending across Europe. It forced the EU to face hard security truths.
Energy Crisis: Russia cutting gas supplies forced rapid diversification (more LNG, faster renewables) and joint efforts like gas purchasing, though at high cost. These crises certainly forced unity and action in areas previously stuck. The question is whether this marks a permanent change or just temporary reactions that will fade.
New Policies, New Rhetoric: Alongside crisis responses, the EU launched big initiatives like the Strategic Compass (defense strategy), Global Gateway (infrastructure), the ACI (anti-coercion tool), plus ongoing defense cooperation efforts (PESCO, EDF) and boosts to intelligence analysis. Leaders talk more about a "geopolitical" EU defending its interests.
What Do the Experts Think? Opinion is split.
Yes, it's waking up: Some argue the responses to the pandemic and Ukraine show new resolve. New economic tools and the focus on strategic autonomy signal a tougher stance.
No, same old problems: Others remain skeptical. They point to lasting internal divisions, huge defense gaps, critical dependencies, and the risks of the new economic tools. They question if strategic autonomy is realistic or if the "Brussels Effect" is fading. Debates continue in think tanks and academia.
Beyond the Metaphor - What Next for the EU?
The "sleeping giant" metaphor captures some truth about the EU. It has enormous potential based on its economy, regulatory power, and diplomatic reach. But the "sleeping" part also rings true due to internal divisions, complex processes, foreign policy and defense weaknesses, critical dependencies, and struggles with a unifying vision.
Ultimately, the label is too simple. The EU isn't fully asleep; it's very active in trade and regulation. Its weakness is more in traditional hard power. And its external actions are tied to its internal health. Maybe "fragmented giant" or "reluctant superpower" fits better.
Recent crises, especially Ukraine, have definitely shaken things up. The EU is acting more assertively than a decade ago. But where it goes next is unclear. Will it become a truly cohesive geopolitical actor, overcoming its divisions and building real strategic autonomy? Will it just "muddle through," reacting to crises but never fixing the underlying problems? Or could internal splits worsen, leading to decline?
The path forward likely depends on global events, internal politics, leadership, the economy, and whether current initiatives actually deliver. To become more influential, the EU likely needs to:
Find greater internal unity and perhaps reform decision-making.
Make defense spending smarter through much deeper cooperation.
Use its economic tools strategically but carefully.
Boost technological strength while managing dependencies.
Develop a clear, compelling story for its role in the world.
Improve how its institutions work for external action.
Overcoming deep-rooted national habits and fragmented structures requires more than just reacting to the latest emergency; it demands tough political choices. Whether the EU has the will for that will determine if the "giant," however we label it, truly steps up.
