Malta, though a small island nation, has played an outsized role in geopolitical and military affairs throughout history. Located at the heart of the Mediterranean, Malta’s geostrategic relevance has endured from antiquity to the present day. As regional tensions rise and military alliances reconfigure, the question of whether Malta is prepared for a more dangerous world resurfaces.

Malta’s Historic Geostrategic importance

Malta’s prime geographic position, nestled between Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East, has made it a vital naval and logistical asset for centuries. It was successively occupied or coveted by the Phoenicians, Romans, Arabs, Knights of St. John, the French, and the British, each recognizing its value in projecting influence across the Mediterranean.

In the 16th and 17th centuries, the Order of St. John transformed Malta into a formidable naval fortress. From the Grand Harbour and fortified cities, the Knights launched missions to protect Christian Europe’s maritime trade from Ottoman and Barbary piracy. By safeguarding merchant routes through the central Mediterranean, Malta played a quiet but crucial role in preserving the European economy and supply chains during a volatile era of empire-building and conflict.

Centuries later, during World War II, Malta once again became a frontline outpost of immense strategic importance. It housed a critical submarine base at Manoel Island and several airstrips across the archipelago, which served as launchpads for Allied missions to disrupt Axis supply convoys bound for North Africa. These efforts crippled Axis logistics and helped turn the tide in the North African Campaign.

The extent of Malta’s importance is encapsulated in German Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, the famed “Desert Fox,” who warned that “Without Malta the Axis will end by losing control of North Africa.” He repeatedly urged Hitler and Mussolini to prioritize an invasion of the island, recognizing that British control of Malta was key for dominance in the Mediterranean.

Later in the war, Malta became a staging ground for Operation Husky, the Allied invasion of Sicily in July 1943. This marked the beginning of the liberation of Europe. Malta’s also showed great adaptive capabilities, pivoting from defense to offense, to play a central role in the Allies’ southern European campaign. 

This same strategic location, has defined Malta as a military outpost for all its history up to 1979. Today, it can still underpin Malta’s importance in modern regional affairs. Its location continues to offer a key foothold in the Mediterranean, relevant not only to military planners but also to global shipping, energy routes, and geopolitical stability. Threats and opportunities are emerging.

From Empire to Independence: The Strategic Shift

The failed Suez Canal campaign, launched by the British from Malta, coupled with innovations such as the nuclear submarine, led the British to decide that a physical landmark in the Mediterranean was no longer necessary to safeguard the modern interests of Britain. Though the British retained military facilities on the island for some years, changing defence strategies, especially the rise of NATO and long-range weaponry, reduced Malta’s strategic necessity. By 1979, all British forces had fully withdrawn, marking the end of an era. For Malta, this meant an unprecedented shift away from a military economy

Modern Strategic Value and Limitations

In the current era, Malta continues to hold military relevance, albeit in a transformed capacity. Its proximity to unstable regions like Libya, its position on major shipping routes, and its EU status give it enduring value. It is well-placed for maritime operations, intelligence gathering, and humanitarian missions.

That said, modern warfare has changed. The need for large, static overseas bases has diminished thanks to long-range drones, satellite surveillance, mobile naval fleets, and cyber operations. Thus, while Malta still offers strategic advantages, its military indispensability has been tempered.

Given the historical role in Mediterranean geostrategy, security threats cannot be excluded in a fully-fledged hot war scenario. Threats include maritime smuggling, cyberattacks, regional instability spilling over, and even the indirect risks posed by great power competition in the Mediterranean. 

From an aggressor’s point of view, Malta would be valuable primarily for its location making it both a valuable asset and also an easy target given its size and isolation. 

If captured, it could serve as a forward base to control maritime chokepoints, stage naval or air operations, monitor enemy activity or prevent its use by the enemy. 

However, the island’s small size and lack of natural resources might deter a conventional occupation , making it more likely to be a strategic stopover than a primary target.

Still, in the event of a regional conflict or power projection race in the Mediterranean, Malta’s neutrality could make it an attractive “first domino” for influence or intimidation.

A Realistic Defense Strategy for Malta

In lieu of large-scale military investments, as a small island at the periphery of Europe, Malta’s strategy should focus on resilience, flexibility, technology, and partnerships. Key areas include:

• Maritime Defense: Modern offshore patrol vessels (OPVs) cost between €20–50 million each depending on configuration and capabilities. Examples include Finland’s Turva-class (€50m), Ireland’s Samuel Beckett-class (€25m) [Source: Naval Technology, Baird Maritime].
• Surveillance and Drones: Medium-altitude long-endurance drones (e.g. Bayraktar TB2, MQ-9 Reaper) range from €5–20 million depending on payload and systems. Cheaper surveillance drones can be procured for under €2 million [Source: SIPRI Arms Transfers Database, Defense News].
• Radar Systems: 3D coastal surveillance radars range from €10–15 million per installation, offering early detection and tracking of ships and low-flying aircraft [Source: Thales, Leonardo].
• Cybersecurity Infrastructure: Estonia’s national cyber defense investments rose from €4 million in 2010 to €20 million annually by 2020. Malta could establish robust defenses with an initial investment of €5–10 million, focused on critical infrastructure, encryption, and training [Source: NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence].
• Force Structure: A full-scale standing army is unnecessary. Malta could maintain a 1,000–2,000-strong, mobile and tech-oriented defense force, trained in joint NATO operations and civil defense , at a fraction of the cost of traditional military structures [Source: Small States and Security, Routledge, 2020]

Based on the above, a modern defense strategy would likely require a total investment of €100m – €220m. This does not account for recurring maintenance, but it sets a benchmark for credible deterrence without overstretching national finances.

Beyond military capabilities, Malta must also build resilience to withstand prolonged periods of besiegement, detached from the rest of the world. More importantly, national morale must be fostered to ensure the population is ready to defend its territory.

Malta’s Moment of Reflection

Malta stands at a crossroads. Its historic neutrality, proud independence, and strategic location offer both strength and vulnerability. As regional threats evolve and alliances shift, Malta must carefully assess whether its current defense posture is fit for purpose.

Investing in a modern defense force , focused on technology, surveillance, and maritime security , is a logical step either way. But ultimately, Malta must have a serious conversation on its national defence capabilities, and decide whether neutrality or deeper cooperation with NATO would best meet our national security interests.