NATO has been begging European nations to fix choke points for its so-called "battle map" for a decade. Now EU commissioners admit they still need to spend £60 billion before NATO troops will be able to move swiftly across Europe.

By Marco Giannangeli, Defence and Diplomatic Editor

12:37, Tue, Mar 25, 2025 | UPDATED: 12:37, Tue, Mar 25, 2025

Stryker

A long column of US Army Stryker vehicles test European border obstacles in 2015. (Image: US army)

Europe needs to spend at least £60billion to rapidly complete its so-called “battle map”- the rail, road, sea, and air corridors which all allow troops to move quickly to the frontline in times of war. NATO has been desperately trying to persuade member states in Europe to fix crucial choke points since 2014, but have been met with obstacles including red tape and non-harmonised procedures.

One problem is that capitals in central and eastern Europe have often been unwilling to force local authorities to pay the money needed to strengthen bridges so they can carry columns of heavy armour, and widen roads. Another is that different countries have different rules. In one case, tanks from one member state were denied passage through another due to exceeding weight limits set by road traffic regulations, the EU's financial watchdog said in a recent report. This is especially key on bridges in Eastern Europe.

Commission Unveils The White Paper For European Defence And ReArm Europe Plan

Warning by EU Commissioner Andrius Kubilius. (Image: Getty)

Challenger 2

Nato's Main Battle Tanks such as the British Challenger 2 weigh more than 60 tonnes. (Image: Mike Whitehurst / MoD)

The £60billion estimate was disclosed by EU Commissioner for Defence and Space Andrius Kubilius.

“We need to develop that infrastructure according to NATO planning. Then we need to see also the need to establish a very effective defence or protection of those strategically important infrastructure points, and in addition to that, we need to look into legal requirements,” the former Lithuanian PM told Euronews.

The use of unspent budgets in various so-called “cohesion funds” - including the EU Transport budget - is being looked at, said the commissioner, adding: “We should look for all the possibilities because the investment into the defence industry is also an investment in economic development. It's the creation of new jobs.” Another solution to simplify the problem is the creation of a “military Schengen”.

This plan has been around for more than a decade, and has been accepted by the US and Canada, which currently require five days’ notice to move troops through European borders.

Invalid email

We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you've consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our Privacy Policy

But while they were both allowed to sign a simple “Administrative Arrangement”, fears remain that the UK may be forced to sign a politically-binding “Administrative Agreement” instead.

Many of the conditions contained in the Administrative Agreement do not seem to relate directly to the swift transit of troops and armour across Europe.

They range from a binding commitment that the UK “must not contravene the security and defence interests of the EU and its member states” to the sharing of all UK military intellectual property and controls over UK exports outside the EU.

The UK would be committed to EU spending targets and harmonisation of capability requirements” and terms “which must only benefit entities which demonstrably provide added value on EU territory”. Crucially, Britain would be expected “to exchange classified information with the EU" in keeping with post-Brexit regulations which see EU member states sharing intelligence openly.

In December 2020, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace rejected joining “because we have serious concerns about the intellectual property rights and export controls that it would seek to impose”.