Europe vulnerable due to its approach to Ukraine war

With the war in Ukraine raging, Europe and the West find themselves caught in a contradiction. How do they promote and push ahead with their military and defense needs while still staying committed to their environmental, social and governance guidelines? The introduction of ESG and diversity, equity and inclusion goals in Western militaries seemed fine during imbalanced conflicts, but it is now revealing flaws in the NATO-supported Ukraine’s confrontation with Russia.

Moreover, we are noticing European leaders calling for the demise of Russia and absolute support for Ukraine, while at the same time calling for the respect and implementation of even more ESG goals at all levels. This situation puts Europe and the West at risk, as their objectives are linked to escalating the conflict but the necessities implied contradict their ESG narrative. Specifically, military and defense investments are considered as beyond the scope and negative industries. This raises the obvious question: how do they plan to beat Russia as they claim? With team bonding exercises?

The disconnect between European politicians’ speeches and actions makes me wonder if they have a secret weapon or if we are witnessing amateurism, pushing the world into the unknown. The current situation is symbolized in tech investments. A significant debate is taking place about whether to invest in dual-use technologies — those with both military and commercial applications — and the need to distinguish between defense and offensive tech. To me, it feels like playing the violin on the Titanic.

I genuinely see the differentiation between dual-use, defensive tech and offensive as a luxury debate when I read the Sky News headline: “Russia is producing artillery shells around three times faster than Ukraine’s Western allies and for about a quarter of the cost.” If Europe does not reinvest in its military-industrial capacity, then, in the event of an escalation, it is in a precarious situation. Industrial strategies need to be aligned with foreign policies. If not, we are heading for a severe reversal. Moreover, what is a rocket if not a missile? Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

This has reminded us that deterrence when it comes to the military is an important word. And one might ask, with the war in Ukraine, have we not passed this? Russia acted and was not deterred. Is there deterrence on the battlefield? Videos from the trenches in Ukraine show nothing but the repulsiveness and brutality of war. There is no ESG or higher moral values, only blood. And the conflict is escalating.

Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski and Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda are pushing for a stronger attack on Moscow. This is in contrast with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s approach and his visit to Moscow. But if they want to reject negotiations or other strategies such as containment, one might ask how this will be achieved. In which case, should Europe not align actions with statements?

This means increasing the military-industrial capacity, which Russia is doing, and in parallel working on what can be the next real deterrent (which your enemies are also working on). Going back to tech investments, this is where venture capitalists and investors should move forward without hesitation. For now, the only deterrence that is back in play is the nuclear one. And it is being used by Russia.

Bluntly, the war in Ukraine has unveiled the West’s ESG goals for the hypocrisy they are. And the political and business leaders who pushed them are now caught up in their contradictions. We all want to live in a better and safer world, but this has been shifted into a political instrument that is doing more harm than good. How can they make aggressive warmongering statements while condemning the development of lethal and powerful weapons? War is a dirty business. It brings blood and corruption and unearths all of humanity’s vices and flaws.

Do you want to build a low-emission armored vehicle while your enemy looks at performance?

Khaled Abou Zahr

I was recently asked how I see the conflict evolving. My answer was clear: If the course of action is not reversed, then there is no doubt that we are heading toward an expansion to other European countries. I am once again repeating myself, but the decisions that are being taken are leading us along this path. And so, short of initiatives, Europe had better be ready. If the continent’s leaders plan to do this on US dime and lives, they will be sorely disappointed.

Instead of a Latin saying, I will now use a Sun Tzu quote: “Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.” Yet, today, ESG goals are making Europe and the West not only appear weak but, even worse, their weakness is now apparent. This not only applies to clauses and conditions for military hardware and software, but also to the selection of people in military and defense. Do you want to build a low-emission armored vehicle while your enemy looks at performance? And who do you want on the battlefield?

When I was younger, I played basketball in my school team. As time passed, my teammates grew in height and, let us say, I grew less. And so, there came a time when the gym teacher did not select me for the team. I understood the reason and accepted reality. I was able to put my energy into other activities. This was a school competition and I would say a mediocre one. How can the same not be applicable when showing deterrence and preparing for war? Will Europe be ready in time?

• Khaled Abou Zahr is the founder of SpaceQuest Ventures, a space-focused investment platform. He is CEO of EurabiaMedia and editor of Al-Watan Al-Arabi.