I think you've been watching too much Fox. The EU is almost totally within NATO, so when you're using the word 'deterrence', and 'near abroad', you're not talki

I think you've been watching too much Fox. The EU is almost totally within NATO, so when you're using the word 'deterrence', and 'near abroad', you're not talking about defensive deterrence. You're talking about the ability to project hard power. That's something most EU citizens have no interest in. When you're talking about 'policing external borders', you're both ignorant of the reality (EU power projection in the 'near abroad' has led to the non-EU states in the periphery stemming migrant flows), and you're again, arguing the EU is lacking something most of its citizens do not want. The vast majority of arrivals in the EU have legitimate claims to asylum, and human rights are a more important value than having proper paperwork. The regulation stuff is what the EU is supposed to do. The whole elevator pitch of the EU is you get all the economic integration without the political integration. So banning IC engines, establishing standards, that kind of stuff, is part of the program. That's why a disparate set of nations that often hate eachother all want to be part of the same union.