Ukraine aid and European defence procurement: insights from the Prague 2024 GLOBSEC Conference

Discussing Ukraine’s defence requirements 

When asked about Ukraine’s military needs, Serhiy Boyev, the Deputy Minister for Strategic Industries of Ukraine, emphasised that hardware and critical raw materials, such as TNT and remain top priorities. A few months ago, citing a discussion paper of the Estonian Defence Ministry, Bohnert concluded that Ukraine requires at least 4,800 anti-air missiles, 2.4 million artillery shells, around 8,000 long-range rockets and a significant amount of long-range munitions per year. President Zelenskyy´s remarks about 14 Ukrainian brigades waiting for equipment also suggest that the demand for armoured vehicles, artillery and air defence will only increase. Notably, Boyev also stressed the importance of defence funding. Ukraine is heavily investing in domestic military production, especially since the supply of Western weapons is uncertain and subject to restrictions (Ukraine is currently prohibited to strike targets deep inside Russia’s territory with Western-supplied long-range munitions. Discussions about lifting the restriction are taking place in these days). In this context, the Bodhana artillery system, the Sea Baby naval drone and the new Palianytsia missile drone are some examples of Ukraine’s creativity. However, Ukraine currently lacks the funding to scale up the production of these systems, which remain in limited supply.

Europe’s support for Ukraine: achievements and areas for improvement 

According to the European Commission, the European Union (EU) and its Member States have provided up to €43.5 billion in military aid to Ukraine. Recently, some EU Member States have stepped up bilateral efforts by pledging new crucial air defence platforms such as Patriot or SAMP-T systems. The Czech initiative to provide Ukraine with around 800.000 artillery shells, which is now proceeding as planned, is another example worthy of mention. At the same time the EU has made notable efforts to step up assistance to the country through collective means. For example, it raised the financial ceiling of the European Peace Facility (EPF) by €5 billion and decided to use the profits from frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine’s needs.

This last development has paved the way for a near-completed G7 deal on a $50 billion loan for Ukraine, backed by the $300 billion frozen Russian assets currently sitting in Europe. The importance of this loan cannot be underestimated, as it would provide Ukraine with the resources to procure Western equipment and the funding it needs for its military industries. However, not all that glitters is gold. Hungary has been blocking EPF reimbursement for a year, the delivery of Patriots and SAMP-T is progressing at a glacial pace, and no recent updates on the conclusion of the $50 billion loan deal have been made public. At the GLOBSEC Conference in Prague, Jiří Šedivý, the European Defence Agency (EDA) Chief Executive, stressed that although the EU has been getting better at delivering weapons to Ukraine, problems remain. Among these are uncertainty in the supply chain, shortage of skilled labour, scarcity of raw material, and a lack of medium- to long-term investments in defence companies, which are still expected to ramp up production. Addressing these issues would transform the EU into a more influential actor supporting Ukraine’s war effort.

Lessons for European defence procurement and cooperation from the Russian invasion of Ukraine 

While aiding Ukraine remains a foreign policy priority for the EU, there are lessons that the European industrial base can learn from the conflict. Last year, the EU High Representative Josep Borell emphasised that Europe’s defence requires a “broader, more reactive industrial and technological base” as its defence industry lacks “critical mass and reactivity”, which hinders its capacity for large-scale production. Robert de Groot, the Vice-President of the European Investment Bank (EIB), concluded at the GLOBSEC conference that the EU is taking small steps in the right direction by facilitating the EIB’s investments in the EU’s defence industry. He added that the priority for the EU right now remains to find creative solutions to enhance joint procurement and interoperability. For example, a fragmented satellite system for surveillance in the EU´s Eastern flank would be highly ineffective. Creating an integrated surveillance system funded by a joint financing vehicle, which would be sustained by a periodic “membership fee” paid by the members could be a solution.

Conclusion

This year’s GLOBSEC Conference presented a series of useful insights on Ukraine aid and European procurement. It is interesting to see how funding for Ukraine’s domestic weapons production is a new priority for the country, which is eager to decrease its dependency on western-supplied systems and fight the Russian invasion more autonomously. To be sure, while European aid to Ukraine remains an important contribution to the country’s effort, Ukraine’s experience highlighted both challenges and opportunities for the European defence industry. On the one hand, the EU must support investments towards the defence sector to make sure that it will be large enough to meet the European armed forces’ needs in case of war. On the other hand, the EU must find ways to encourage common procurement and interoperability, which remain crucial aspects of any future integrated European security framework.

Source: Finabel – European Army Interoperability Centre.