The European Defence Industry: From Dependence to Sovereignty

Download the policy brief

Several solutions are available. Purely domestic production may be suitable for certain large countries, but it remains costly and ill-suited for smaller states. Diversifying suppliers can address urgent needs, but it often merely replaces one dependency with another. Licensed production, tied to U.S. purchases, can facilitate technology transfers, but it generally leaves technological dependency intact. Integration of the European defence market would theoretically be the most effective solution, but it faces resistance due to differences among member states, which view it as a threat to their national industries.

The most promising option, therefore, is to strengthen European industrial cooperation. This would make it possible to share R&D costs, generate economies of scale, improve the interoperability of armed forces, and foster the emergence of industrial players capable of competing with major U.S. corporations. Yet, as demonstrated by the recent failure of the Future Air Combat System (FCAS), such cooperation remains difficult to implement due to diverging military doctrines, national requirements for industrial return on investment, rivalries among manufacturers, disagreements over exports, and states’ desire to retain a high degree of autonomy over certain equipment deemed critical to national sovereignty.

To foster cooperation, several levers can be activated. First, it is necessary to better define what equipment falls under national sovereignty and what can be produced through joint action. It is also necessary to identify common capability gaps, harmonise standards and doctrines, and strengthen European planning and financing instruments. Finally, Europe must improve the governance of its programmes. This entails prioritising integrated consortia or designating a single industrial prime contractor, loosening the geographical return principle, and establishing a common doctrine on exports.

Within this new framework, the European Union must endorse the role of sovereignty enabler, either through financing via budgetary support for joint projects, innovation via public procurement of innovative products, or coordination via monitoring defence efforts announced by member states.

The opinions expressed are those of the authors and are not intended to reflect the position of the French government.