Two thirds of Danes voted in favor of Denmark taking part in the European Union defence policy known as the CSDP in a national referendum. Official results after all votes were counted showed 66.9 percent support and 33.1 percent opposition. Today Denmark remains a member of NATO and participates in alliance operations, yet it is the only EU country not participating in the CSDP as a policy framework.
What is CSDP?
The European Union’s Common Security and Defence Policy, abbreviated as CSDP, was established in 1999. It directs the EU’s approach to defense and crisis management and forms the core of the broader EU Foreign and Security Policy framework, known as CFSP. CSDP enables both military and civilian missions aimed at peacekeeping, conflict prevention, and strengthening international security in line with United Nations principles. When military action is involved, EU forces operate with contributions from the member states’ armed forces. In addition to external missions, CSDP also includes mechanisms for collective self defense among EU members who share security commitments.
The question of participation has shaped Denmark’s recent political landscape. The country has long observed EU defense policy discussions from the outside, occasionally stepping back from joint operations and defence procurement decisions. Danish representatives have sometimes exited EU security discussions to avoid entanglement in policy details that intersect with national interests.
Historically, Denmark rejected the Maastricht Treaty and was granted a path to EU membership in 1993 only after an agreement on four policy areas including currency, citizenship, justice and home affairs, and defence. Danish governments have since twice attempted to alter this stance through referendums but the country has remained outside certain monetary and legal reforms. In the latest political climate, Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen indicated a referendum would be held in early March after a broad parliamentary consensus emerged calling for a National Accord on Danish Security Policy. The pact also envisages steps such as boosting defence spending from 1.44 percent of GDP to two percent, allocating one billion dollars to urgent defence investments, and addressing any budget gaps that arise from increased spending.
When the referendum results were announced, the prime minister expressed satisfaction and pride, calling the decision a correct one for Denmark and for the European continent. He framed it as a clear signal to allies across the Atlantic and the EU alike.
Europe after February 24
The moment the referendum was announced, Danish leadership stressed that in a few days the world had shifted. The continent appeared split into a period before and after February 24 when Russia began its military operation in Ukraine. In the wake of this shift, Sweden and Finland moved away from neutrality and pursued NATO membership, a development seen as a major strategic consequence by many observers. Germany’s leadership followed with a pledge to raise defence spending to two percent of GDP in the coming years. A 100 billion euro fund was proposed to modernize the German armed forces, with moves likely to require constitutional changes and broad parliamentary support.
From policy talk to military readiness
Following February 24 Denmark and other EU nations turned more attention to strengthening military capabilities. In March the EU advanced a defence strategy called the Strategic Compass. The bloc began planning a rapid response force capable of addressing a range of crises. Josep Borrell, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, highlighted the shift toward a stronger European security posture. The idea was to give the EU the language of power while ensuring member states can act decisively when needed.
Analysts note that while the EU has a robust set of defence mechanisms in place, it still has a long way to go before functioning as a fully autonomous military power. Denmark, with a history of close cooperation with the United States, has faced questions about how its role within the EU framework will evolve. Some observers caution that deeper EU military integration would require navigating complex political and constitutional hurdles, including alliance commitments with NATO and transatlantic security considerations.
Experts cited in coverage emphasize that the transformation of the EU into a fully independent military alliance is unlikely. Russia has its own criticisms to contend with, but the EU’s security architecture remains rooted in broader transatlantic cooperation rather than a single national bloc. Analysts also point out that the Danes, along with other EU partners, will weigh how any shift in policy affects defense procurement, cross-border defense collaborations, and regional stability.
Timofei Bordachev of the Valdai Club stressed that national autonomy in security policy will continue to coexist with EU defense structures, while suggesting that Denmark’s stance signals steadfast Atlantic partnership rather than a move toward autonomous EU defense policy. Contemporary observers forecast that Denmark will remain engaged with EU security discussions while continuing to balance its longstanding alliance with the United States and its NATO commitments.
Oleg Barabanov, a professor at the Higher School of Economics, remarked that while EU defense arrangements exist, they do not yet replace national and allied security frameworks. He noted that Denmark is among the nations that maintain a skeptical stance toward Russia and will likely participate in EU discussions within the bounds of its own security interests. The overarching view among experts is that the EU will continue seeking stronger strategic coordination rather than pursuing a single European military command in the near term. Attribution: analysis from political commentators consulted by regional outlets.