Miruţă said in an interview with Libertatea that the Ministry of Finance had not yet signed the financing agreement with the European Commission. The funding package is worth almost €17 billion and is intended to support Romania’s defence and public order system, as well as sections of the A7 and A8 motorways in northern Moldova.
The defence minister also said the Ministry of Finance had not approved the commitment credits needed for the army to advance equipment contracts worth more than €8 billion. With only 12 days left before the deadline, he admitted that some contracts included in the SAFE programme might not be signed in time.
The situation raises questions over Romania’s ability to move quickly on defence procurement despite access to major EU-backed financing. According to the report, the delay could affect contracts intended to support the modernisation of the Romanian Armed Forces.
Miruţă also discussed Russian drones that have violated Romanian airspace. He said the U.S.-made Merops counter-drone system had recently entered combat service with the Romanian Army and had already been used.
Separately, PSD issued a statement accusing the government of improper influence in relation to the SAFE programme. The party said it “denounces the scandalous influence peddling carried out in the office of dismissed Prime Minister Ilie Bolojan, for the conclusion of a secret agreement between the Romanian Government and a private German supplier of military equipment, targeting funds guaranteed with European money and available for equipping the Romanian Army under the Security Action for Europe financial instrument.”
PSD also demanded explanations from Bolojan over the selection of a law firm that advised him in the matter. The party alleged that the firm faced a major conflict of interest because it had worked for both sides involved in the negotiations.
PSD asked the prime minister “to explain to Romanian taxpayers how the law firm that advised him in this case was selected, given the major conflict of interest in which it found itself, since it worked for both parties involved in the negotiation: on the one hand, it provided consultancy to the Romanian Government, and on the other hand, it acted as the legal representative of the German group in many other legal cases.”
“Therefore, whose interests were defended by the law firm selected under obscure conditions by the Prime Minister’s Chancellery? Those of the Romanian state or those of the private German supplier of military equipment?” PSD added.
The dispute comes at a critical point for Romania’s use of SAFE funding, with the defence ministry still waiting for financial approvals needed to proceed with procurement. It also highlights growing political tension over how European-backed defence funds are being managed and whether key contracts can be completed before the deadline.
Source: monitorulapararii.ro.
