Romania’s Ministry of National Defence (MApN) indicated that the country’s €3 billion Infantry Fighting Vehicle (MLI) programme is set to be awarded to Germany’s Rheinmetall, raising concerns of a collusive outcome despite controversy over a proposed price increase of 30% or more.
According to multiple informed sources, Defence Minister Radu Miruță acknowledged the behind-the-scenes arrangement during a recent Q&A with journalists. The remarks came even after he publicly criticized suppliers proposing price increases of more than 30% and insisted that Romania would not give in.
“The MLI programme will go to Rheinmetall,” he was quoted as saying, when asked whether other suppliers would be invited to submit proposals if price negotiations with the preferred suppliers are not successful.
For the IFV programme, Rheinmetall is the only company that has received the Request for Information (RFI) from the Romanian government, while other potential competitors were not invited to participate in the same process.
Sources say that under these conditions, Rheinmetall has sought to reduce the number of IFVs in the programme rather than offer meaningful price reductions, effectively shifting the burden onto the Romanian government during negotiations.
The development further reinforces concerns that major defence procurement programs have not been conducted on a level playing field, but rather implemented in line with what appears to be a politically agreed outcome—compromising transparency and fair competition in one of Romania’s most significant defence acquisition programmes.
Defence observers raise concerns that Romania’s SAFE-funded defence procurement framework is being used in a way that limits competition and undermines accountability.
As one of Romania’s largest land modernisation efforts in decades, the MLI program aims to deliver 298 infantry fighting vehicles, replacing aging Soviet-era platforms with advanced, NATO-standard systems. Beyond capability, the programme carries substantial industrial and economic implications. It is expected to drive local production, technology transfer, and long-term integration into Romania’s defence industrial base—making transparency and fair competition not only a procurement issue, but a matter of national economic interest.
In this context, Rheinmetall’s Lynx platform—primarily produced at its established manufacturing hub in Hungary—raises inherent limitations on the scope for meaningful industrial value creation within Romania.
Unfair defence procurement practices under scrutiny
Similar concerns have emerged across other SAFE-funded procurement programmes, including Romania’s NATO-standard individual weapons acquisition initiative.
Industry sources indicate that multiple qualified suppliers—including FN Herstal, CZ Group, Beretta, Heckler & Koch and SIG Sauer—have been linked to the programme. However, reports suggest that detailed technical specifications and formal requests for quotation were ultimately shared with only a single company.
This raises not only concerns over fairness, but also potential procedural and legal risks. Under Romania’s SAFE implementing ordinance, authorities are required to issue Requests for Information (RFI) to all identified qualified suppliers and conduct a comparative evaluation based on transparent criteria, including delivery timelines and price.
A selective approach—where only one supplier is provided with full specifications and invited to submit a detailed offer—could be seen as inconsistent with these requirements, potentially undermining both the integrity of the evaluation process and the government’s legal position in the event of challenges from excluded bidders.
Changing the rules — for whom?
Originally introduced as an emergency mechanism to accelerate defence acquisitions, the SAFE framework in Romania was formalized through Government Emergency Ordinance (GEO) 62/2025. The system was designed to enable rapid procurement through simplified procedures and centralized coordination led by the Prime Minister’s Chancellery.
However, the framework also establishes clear safeguards to preserve competition. When multiple suppliers are identified, authorities are required to issue RFIs to all qualified candidates and conduct a structured evaluation based on delivery timelines and price.
Recent developments and proposed amendments risk weakening these safeguards. Early designation of preferred suppliers, cross-programme cooperation frameworks, and post-award adjustments—including price increases combined with reduced quantities—could enable outcomes to be shaped in advance rather than determined through open competition.
In parallel, greater flexibility in localisation requirements—such as aggregating commitments across programmes—may allow suppliers to meet targets on paper while limiting meaningful industrial participation at the project level.
This risks diluting one of SAFE’s core objectives: strengthening Europe’s defence industrial base through broad-based participation, rather than concentrating benefits among a limited group of established suppliers.
Rather than driving balanced industrial development, such an approach could result in selective localisation, where economic gains are concentrated outside Romania despite significant public investment.
“What Romanian citizens expect includes local jobs, industrial investment and technology transfer to strengthen the national economy,” said former Defense Minister Ioan Mircea Pascu.
“Ensuring fair and open competition is essential to maximise the national interest. Even when suppliers come from outside the European Union, those who meet the SAFE criteria should have the opportunity to compete and be evaluated on an equal footing.”
