Portugal has firmly rejected the idea of a separate European army, placing itself at odds with Spain and reopening a long-running debate over the future of Europe’s defence architecture at a time of heightened geopolitical uncertainty.

Speaking in Lisbon, Portugal’s Defence Minister Nuno Melo made clear that the country does not support the creation of a unified EU military force, instead reiterating that national security should continue to be anchored within NATO and the transatlantic alliance with the United States. The comments underline a clear policy distinction emerging within the Iberian Peninsula, where Spain has recently taken a more integrationist stance on European defence cooperation.

The divergence reflects broader tensions within the European Union over how far defence integration should go at a moment when European governments are reassessing long-standing assumptions about US security guarantees. Spain has argued in favour of deeper coordination and, in some formulations, the eventual creation of a European army capable of acting independently of Washington. Portugal, by contrast, has signalled that such ambitions risk duplicating NATO structures and undermining existing defence commitments.

Lisbon’s position is consistent with its longstanding strategic doctrine. Since joining NATO in 1949, Portugal has generally prioritised the alliance as the cornerstone of its defence policy, viewing it as both a security guarantee and a framework for interoperability with allied forces. Officials in Lisbon have repeatedly emphasised that European defence cooperation should complement, rather than replace, NATO.

The Portuguese stance also reflects practical considerations. With a relatively small armed forces structure compared with larger EU member states, Portugal has historically relied on collective defence arrangements. Military planners in Lisbon have tended to favour incremental modernisation of national capabilities over ambitious supranational restructuring.

By contrast, Spain has increasingly argued that Europe must develop greater “strategic autonomy” in response to shifting geopolitical realities, including uncertainty over future US engagement in European security. Spanish officials have suggested that fragmentation across 27 national militaries reduces efficiency and limits the EU’s ability to respond rapidly to crises.

These competing visions have surfaced periodically over the past decade but have gained renewed attention amid broader concerns about global instability, including Russia’s war in Ukraine, tensions in the Indo-Pacific, and debates within NATO about burden-sharing.

At the heart of the disagreement is not whether Europe should spend more on defence — both Portugal and Spain have recently increased military budgets to meet NATO’s 2% of GDP target — but whether such spending should ultimately lead to deeper military integration at the EU level.

Portugal’s Defence Ministry has stressed that strengthening NATO remains the most effective route to collective security. Officials argue that duplicating command structures or creating parallel EU military institutions could dilute resources and complicate operational coordination. Supporters of this view often point to NATO’s established command architecture, intelligence-sharing systems and nuclear deterrence framework as irreplaceable components of European security.

Proponents of a European army, however, counter that NATO’s effectiveness is inherently tied to US political will. They argue that Europe must be prepared for scenarios in which Washington reduces its commitment or shifts strategic focus elsewhere, making autonomous European capabilities increasingly relevant.

The debate is not purely theoretical. The EU already maintains limited joint military structures, including battlegroups and multinational formations, but these fall far short of a standing integrated army. Efforts to expand cooperation have historically been hampered by differences in strategic culture, industrial policy and national sovereignty concerns.

Portugal’s position is likely to reassure NATO advocates who fear duplication of effort, including senior figures within the alliance who have repeatedly warned against undermining its cohesion. At the same time, Spain’s stance reflects a growing current within parts of the EU that favour deeper integration as a response to global fragmentation.

For now, the gap between Lisbon and Madrid highlights the enduring complexity of European defence policy: a continent united in principle on collective security, but divided on how, and by whom, that security should ultimately be guaranteed.

Main Image: European People’s Party – EPP Political Assembly, 17-18 November, Lisbon

Soldiers in Short Supply: Europe’s Armed Forces Face a Recruitment Reckoning