“It won’t be easy to move Member States out of a nationalistic approach”, admitted Herald Ruijters, Deputy Director-General of the European Commission, on Thursday 25 September, during a debate in the European Parliament’s Committee on Security and Defence on the introduction of the ‘SAFE’ instrument. This will provide up to €150 billion in loans to EU countries to increase their military spending between now and 2030 (see EUROPE 13649/23).
According to Mr Ruijters, recent incidents involving the intrusion of Russian military aircraft into NATO airspace are forcing Member States to think European when it comes to their defence investment projects (see EUROPE 13715/21). In response to a question from Hannah Neumann (Greens/EFA, German), he expressed optimism that EU countries would be able to use the SAFE instrument to launch “a majority of actions through joint public procurement” of military equipment.
The ‘SAFE’ instrument authorises a Member State, until May 2026, to benefit from European funds for purely national contracts, provided that it does its utmost to ensure that at least one other Member State benefits. The Commission representative promised that the Commission would ensure that this was indeed the case.
Third countries. Several MEPs, including Hélder Sousa Silva (EPP, Portuguese) and Petras Auštrevičius (Renew Europe, Lithuanian), questioned the European official about the participation of third countries in the ‘SAFE’ instrument.
Mr Ruijters pointed out that only EU Member States will receive European loans on the basis of national investment plans due by the end of November. Other countries - Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Sweden - have announced their intention to take part in group purchases, but without benefiting from loans.
EFTA countries and Ukraine will be able to take part in joint purchases, provided that at least 65% of the components of an item of equipment come from companies established in the EU. The European Commission is currently negotiating the participation of the United Kingdom and Canada (see EUROPE 13711/25), third countries which have concluded security and defence partnerships with the EU.
According to Mr Ruijters, during negotiations with third countries on bilateral agreements, the criteria relating to components (65%-35%) could be revised to increase the sourcing of components from British and Canadian companies.
As far as Ukraine is concerned, the EU countries will be able to invite Kyiv to take part in joint purchases, invite Ukrainian industry to produce on their territory (Danish model) and/or make direct donations of military equipment to the Ukrainian army.
Mr Ruijters also indicated that other third countries, such as Turkey and South Korea, which have signed security and defence partnerships with the EU, can also negotiate their participation in the ‘SAFE’ instrument. Moldova is also in this situation, but unlike the two previous countries, it has not officially approached the Commission to negotiate its participation.
Asked about the possibility of companies established in the EU but controlled by Turkish companies benefiting from European funds, Costas Mavrides (S&D, Cypriot) stressed that in such a case, which would apply to any third country, the Member States would have to provide guarantees that the projects supported “do not conflict with the essential security interests of the EU”.
EDIP. Sebastiaan Stöteler (PfE, Dutch) and Christophe Gomart (EPP, French) questioned the possible links between the SAFE instrument and the European Defence Industry Programme (EDIP), the latter being the subject of interinstitutional negotiations (see EUROPE 13715/20).
“The two are complementary, but they are not in sync”, said Mr Ruijters, noting that the ‘SAFE’ instrument will provide loans while the EDIP programme will provide grants. It will not be possible to redirect ‘SAFE’ loans into the ‘grants’ compartment of EDIP, he added, advocating nevertheless “smart programming” to facilitate synergies.
Finally, to Lucie Yar (Renew Europe, Slovakian), who wondered what impact the Parliament’s appeal against the legal basis (Article 122) for the ‘SAFE’ instrument might have, the European official replied that “the reality [on the ground] shows the urgency becoming unfortunately flagrantly visible to all of us, day after day”. (Original version in French by Mathieu Bion)