21-11-2025


The challenge for non-expansionist Europe

Defensive postures create strategic disadvantages

Western European countries thrived when they colonised large parts of the world. Some say this is because they exploited their colonies.

Nowadays almost all the old colonies have regained their independence, and Europe is no longer on an "expansionist" path.

However, the fact that Europe is no longer trying to conquer new territories doesn't mean that other countries are following the same path. 

European countries have now woken up to the fact that they are surrounded by expansionist blocks such as Russia, China and the US. 

I am certainly not advocating that Europe should return to the era of colonisation and its disastrous consequences. 

But I wonder whether Europe's "defensive" mindset is effectively putting itself in a position of inferiority against these expansionist blocks.

Different mindsets

The fundamental difference between expansionist and defensive powers isn't just about territory, it's also about mindset.

Countries pursuing expansion, whether territorial, economic, or influence based, operate with an offensive mindset that drives everything from policymaking to business culture.

They focus on what they can take rather than on what they might lose.

Appetite for risk

Expansionist countries demonstrate a fundamentally different relationship with risk.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine, China's island-building in the South China Sea, and America's declared interest to annex Canada and Greenland all reflect a comfort with uncertainty and potential conflict that defensive powers avoid.

Having emerged from centuries of devastating wars, Europe has understandably adopted a risk-averse posture. The EU's institutions prioritise consensus, stability, and conflict avoidance.

But this caution comes at a cost: expansionist powers set the agenda while defensive ones respond to it.

When you're always reacting to the moves of others, you're perpetually playing catch-up. 

You're forced to operate within frameworks others have established, respond to crises others have created, and defend against initiatives you didn't foresee.

Complacency

Defensive mindsets breed complacency. 

When your primary goal is preserving what you have rather than gaining what you don't, you underinvest in the capabilities needed for competition.

Why build a robust military when you haven't faced an existential threat in decades? 

Why develop strategic autonomy in critical industries when global markets have reliably provided what you need?

This complacency leaves defensive powers vulnerable to sudden shocks.

Europe's energy dependence on Russia seemed economically rational until it became a weapon.

Europe's reliance on Chinese manufacturing seemed efficient until it became a strategic liability.

Europe's assumption that American security guarantees were permanent seemed reasonable until they weren't.

The moral dimension

Being aggressive, risk-taking, and willing to reshape international order to your advantage is certainly not morally superior.

The colonial era demonstrated that expansionist mindsets lead to exploitation, subjugation, and terrible human suffering.

Europe's defensive posture reflects hard-learnt wisdom about the costs of aggression.

The question isn't whether expansion is good, but whether there's a middle ground between colonial aggression and strategic passivity.

The challenge

Europe’s challenge is to recognise that in a world where other major powers operate with expansionist mindsets, defensive postures create compounding disadvantages.

You lose initiative, you lose speed, you lose confidence, and eventually you lose the ability to shape outcomes that affect your own security and prosperity.

Europe must find a way to be assertive without being imperial, to take strategic risks without abandoning democratic values, to set agendas without exploiting others.

Whether such a balance is achievable remains one of the defining questions of our era.