Title: The Imperative for Clarity in European Defense Governance: Mitigating Waste and Enhancing Strategic Autonomy
Abstract
Post-2022 European defense spending initiatives, driven by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and declining U.S. NATO commitments, have highlighted a critical gap: fragmented governance structures. This paper examines how overlapping roles among EU institutions, NATO, and national governments have led to inefficiencies, including redundant projects, delayed procurement, and inflated costs. Drawing on Camille Grand’s critique and recent policy developments, it argues that clarifying institutional mandates and streamlining decision-making are essential for fiscal responsibility and strategic autonomy. The analysis concludes with actionable recommendations for EU leaders to harmonize defense efforts.
- Introduction
The European defense landscape has undergone a seismic shift since 2022, marked by a surge in defense budgets and a recalibration of strategic priorities. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and U.S. President Donald Trump’s skepticism toward NATO commitments have accelerated discussions on reducing reliance on U.S. security guarantees. Consequently, the European Union (EU) has expanded its role in defense policymaking, with institutions such as the European Commission and the European Defence Agency (EDA) playing pivotal roles. However, as Camille Grand of the Aerospace, Security and Defence Industries Association of Europe (ASD) warns, the absence of a coherent governance framework risks wasting resources and undermining strategic unity. This paper evaluates the challenges of fragmented defense governance in Europe and proposes solutions to align institutional roles for efficiency and autonomy. - Background: The Evolving European Defense Landscape
Historically, NATO and national governments have dominated European defense policymaking. However, the EU’s growing involvement—from the European Defence Fund (EDF) to the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) initiative—reflects a shift toward collective self-reliance. Key objectives include closing capability gaps (e.g., counter-drone systems), modernizing defense industries, and fostering joint procurement. While these efforts aim to enhance strategic autonomy, they have introduced a proliferation of actors and initiatives, creating a “labyrinth” of overlapping mandates.
Key Drivers of Change:
Geopolitical Pressures: The Ukraine war and U.S. policy uncertainty.
Technological Modernization: Demand for advanced systems (e.g., AI, cyber defenses).
Industrial Integration: Reducing duplication and leveraging economies of scale.
- Analysis of Current Challenges
3.1. Fragmentation of Governance
The EDA, European Commission, NATO, and national ministries often operate in parallel without clear delineation of responsibilities. For instance, the EDA coordinates capability development, while the Commission funds innovation via the EDF, and NATO provides strategic direction. This duplication leads to:
Competing Priorities: National governments prioritize domestic interests, complicating joint projects.
Slow Decision-Making: Lengthy approval processes and bureaucratic inertia delay critical investments.
3.2. Case Studies in Inefficiency
FCAS (Future Combat Air System): A Franco-German-Spanish initiative grappling with delays due to coordination hurdles.
Joint Weapon Procurement: Repeated failures to secure cross-border contracts, as seen in the Eurofighter Typhoon program.
3.3. Financial Implications
The ASD cites redundancies in programs like satellite surveillance and maritime patrols, which inflate costs. For example, France and Germany separately developing similar radar systems instead of pooling resources.
- Implications for Strategic Autonomy and Fiscal Responsibility
Without governance reform, Europe risks:
Strategic Vulnerabilities: Prolonged gaps in critical capabilities (e.g., hypersonic weapons, AI-driven surveillance).
Fiscal Waste: The European Court of Auditors estimates that inefficient procurement could cost €10–15 billion annually.
Erosion of Industry Competitiveness: Companies like BAE Systems face market fragmentation, reducing their ability to innovate.
- Recommendations for Governance Clarity
5.1. Establish a Central Defense Coordination Mechanism
Create a unified body within the EU to oversee defense initiatives, merging the roles of the EDA and European Commission’s defense divisions. This entity would:
Define clear mandates for each actor (EU vs. NATO vs. national actors).
Streamline project approvals to avoid duplication.
5.2. Harmonize National Programs
Sovereignty Compromise: Encourage EU member states to adopt a “bottom-up” model for joint projects, with EU oversight to align national and collective goals.
Incentivize Collaboration: Tie EDF funding to participation in joint initiatives.
5.3. Strengthen Procurement Agility
Introduce a fast-track process for urgent procurements (e.g., counter-drone systems).
Leverage data-sharing platforms to identify capability overlaps.
5.4. Foster Dialogue with Industry
Involve companies in early-stage planning to ensure projects meet operational and technical needs.
Address industry concerns about bureaucratic delays and opaque funding criteria.
- Conclusion
The European defense industry’s call for clarity is a clarion call for reform. Without a coherent governance strategy, Europe’s aspirational goal of strategic autonomy will remain unattainable. By unifying institutional mandates, harmonizing national efforts, and prioritizing efficiency, EU leaders can transform defense spending from a liability into a cornerstone of collective security. The time for action is critical: as the ASD warns, delays risk squandering both financial resources and the continent’s strategic future.
References
Reuters. (2026). “European defence needs more clarity to avoid wasting time and money, industry says.” Reuters.
European Court of Auditors. (2025). Special Report on Defense Procurement Efficiency.
ASD. (2024). Aerospace, Security & Defence Industries Association of Europe Annual Report.
European Commission. (2023). Programme Guide for the European Defence Fund.