The legacy of Brexit continues to cast a long shadow over UK-EU relations, and now, defense cooperation appears to be the latest battleground. According to Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas, several EU member states are strongly opposed to allowing the UK access to the bloc’s new €150 billion rearmament fund. In an exclusive interview with Sky News, Kallas revealed that “Brexit wounds” are still fresh, with some countries adamant that Britain—having chosen to leave—should not benefit from EU defense initiatives like full members.
This controversy comes at a critical time. With rising threats on Europe’s eastern flank, spurred by Russia’s war in Ukraine, the European Union is urgently working to ramp up its defense production and military readiness. But while unity and collaboration are touted as essential, political grudges from Brexit seem to be fracturing the continent’s ability to act as one. The UK, despite being a nuclear power and a key NATO ally, may find itself sidelined—again.
Background on the EU’s Rearmament Fund
The €150 billion rearmament fund—officially known as the European Defence Industrial Strategy (EDIS)—was announced as a response to the increasingly precarious security environment in Europe. Its goal is straightforward: strengthen the EU’s defense capabilities, boost arms manufacturing within the bloc, and reduce dependency on foreign suppliers, particularly from outside Europe.
The fund is aimed at co-financing military production, modernizing defense infrastructure, and ensuring member states can respond quickly and collectively to emerging threats. While the EU has always promoted joint defense efforts, Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine served as a massive wake-up call. Ammunition stockpiles have dwindled, military equipment is aging, and the need for rapid mobilization has never been clearer.
In theory, cooperation with close allies—even those outside the EU—should enhance security for the entire region. But when it comes to the UK, emotions and politics are getting in the way of practical defense logic.
UK’s Post-Brexit Defense Relations with the EU
Since leaving the EU in 2020, the UK has sought to maintain strong defense ties with Europe. It remains a cornerstone of NATO, one of the world’s largest military spenders, and a critical player in global security. However, formal defense cooperation between the UK and EU institutions has remained limited and ad hoc, mostly due to unresolved Brexit tensions.
The UK has participated in several joint operations and intelligence-sharing agreements through NATO and bilateral partnerships with France, Germany, and others. Yet, its exclusion from EU defense initiatives like the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) framework and the European Defence Fund has underscored the geopolitical cost of Brexit.
London has argued repeatedly that security should transcend political divisions. British officials have warned that excluding the UK from key defense funding pools would weaken Europe’s collective defense posture. But despite these appeals, EU policymakers—especially from France—have pushed back, citing the need to prioritize internal unity and strategic autonomy within the bloc.
Kaja Kallas’ Statement and Its Implications
Kaja Kallas, Estonia’s Prime Minister and a frontrunner to become the next NATO Secretary General, didn’t mince words in her recent interview with Sky News. She acknowledged that some EU nations feel the UK forfeited its right to shared defense benefits when it voted to leave the European Union.
“Some countries are still carrying Brexit wounds,” Kallas stated. “They feel that the UK made its choice and now shouldn’t have the same benefits as member states.”
Her comments reflect a broader undercurrent of resentment among EU members who see Britain’s requests for access to defense funds as opportunistic. Kallas, however, also recognized the strategic importance of cooperation, noting that security threats do not respect political boundaries.
The debate over UK access is not just about politics—it’s about the operational future of European defense. If one of NATO’s most capable militaries is excluded from the EU’s largest-ever defense investment, it risks fragmenting the continent’s defense architecture at a time when unity is most needed.
France’s Position on Limiting UK Access
France has emerged as the most vocal opponent of granting the UK access to the rearmament fund. French officials argue that the EU must focus on building its own defense sovereignty and not rely on outside powers, even close allies like Britain. Paris believes that by prioritizing internal collaboration, the EU can reduce its dependence on NATO and the U.S., creating a more autonomous European defense identity.
This vision, however, comes with trade-offs. France’s stance could isolate the UK and complicate joint arms projects like the Future Combat Air System (FCAS), in which Britain plays a key role. Moreover, it could hurt EU defense manufacturers who partner with British firms, thereby slowing down the very rearmament goals the fund is designed to achieve.
The French-led opposition has reportedly delayed discussions about third-country access to the fund, with insiders suggesting that full exclusion remains a serious option. For British defense firms, this could mean missing out on billions in funding, contracts, and research opportunities.
This fracture is a stark reminder that Brexit wasn’t just an economic divorce—it was a strategic one, too. And its consequences are still unfolding on Europe’s geopolitical stage.
