European defence industry transformation roadmap - Timeline

Timeline
Interinstitutional Timeline

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee – Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council – EU Defence Industry Transformation Roadmap: Unleashing Disruptive Innovation for Defence Readiness (Optional referral) (COM(2025) 845 final)

EESC 2026/00134

OJ C, C/2026/3232, 2.7.2026, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/3232/oj (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/3232/oj

Date of document:: 18/03/2026; Date of vote
Date of vote:: 18/03/2026
Date lodged:: 05/01/2026

Author:: European Economic and Social Committee
Responsible body:: Consultative Commission on Industrial Change, EESC_CCMI
Rapporteur:: Maurizio MENSI
Co-rapporteur:: Christophe TYTGAT
Form:: Opinion
Internal reference:: CCMI/256, AVIS-SECTION 2026/0134 FIN
Session:: 604

Treaty:

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Legal basis:

12016E304
32022Q0531(01) - A52P2

Link

Select all documents mentioning this document

Earlier related instruments:

52025DC0845 ESC Opinion

Instruments cited:

EUROVOC descriptor:

Subject matter:

Directory code:

13.20.70.00 Industrial policy and internal market / Industrial policy: sectoral operations / Other industrial sectors
18.00.00.00 Common Foreign and Security Policy

HTML

PDF - authentic OJ

e-signature

How to verify the authenticity of the Official Journal

Official Journal
of the European Union

C series

C/2026/3232

2.7.2026

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council – EU Defence Industry Transformation Roadmap: Unleashing Disruptive Innovation for Defence Readiness

(Optional referral)

(COM(2025) 845 final)

(C/2026/3232)

Rapporteur:

Maurizio MENSI (IT, Group III)

Co-rapporteur:

Christophe TYTGAT (BE, Category 1)

Advisor	Gabriel JORY (to the Gr. III rapporteur) Malgorzata DAROWSKA (to the Gr. I co-rapporteur)
Plenary Assembly decision	18.3.2026
Legal basis	Rule 52(2) of the Rules of Procedure
Referral	5.1.2026
Legal basis	Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Section responsible	Consultative Commission of Industrial Change
Adopted in section	10.3.2026
Adopted at plenary session	18.3.2026
Plenary session No	604
Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions)	197/3/6

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1.

The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) fully supports the adoption of the EU Defence Industry Transformation Roadmap.

1.2.

The EESC believes that the transformation of the European defence industry must aim to restore industrial strategic autonomy: the ability to design, manufacture, maintain and develop critical systems with resilient and scalable supply chains. The roadmap should set the recovery of European industrial strategic autonomy as its central objective, with verifiable indicators of production capacity, territoriality, dependency and social resilience, in line with the Defence Readiness Roadmap 2030, the subject of opinion CCMI/253.

1.3.

The EESC highlights that technological sovereignty is needed and requires strategic autonomy and leadership in knowledge: talent, engineering, technology centres, technology transfer, intellectual property and production capacities, throughout the supply chain including components and critical raw materials.

1.4.

The EESC underlines that funding for the EU Defence Industry Transformation Roadmap must not come at the expense of existing support for the European defence technological and industrial base, or undermine the social, digital and environmental transition objectives that are essential for the EU’s economic security and social stability.

1.5.

The EESC emphasises the importance of ensuring the effective integration of the actions set out in the EU Defence Industry Transformation Roadmap with existing Union and NATO programmes. The implementation of the Roadmap should explicitly take into account the specificities of the maritime domain and provides tailored pathways for the rapid but secure integration of innovative technologies into naval forces.

1.6.

The EESC calls for the Roadmap’s implementation to be designed so that scaling up the defence industrial base does not concentrate the benefits in a few prime contractors and localities, but instead diffuses them across the wider EU industrial fabric, especially SMEs and dual-use sectors such as advanced manufacturing technologies and automotive that underpin overall manufacturing capacity.

1.7.

The EESC calls on the Member States to take the necessary measures, within their respective competences, to contribute to the attainment of the objectives of the EU Defence Industry Transformation Roadmap.

1.8.

The EESC recommends that the European Commission further develops appropriate mechanisms to facilitate effective cooperation between new defence actors and established defence industrial stakeholders.

1.9.

The EESC underlines the fact that efforts to strengthen agility and flexibility in defence innovation should not undermine the fundamental principles of transparency, equal treatment and sound financial management.

1.10.

The EESC recommends that the European Commission pursues further regulatory simplification and, where appropriate, harmonisation as means of supporting the achievement of the objectives of the EU Defence Industry Transformation Roadmap.

1.11.

The EESC supports the proposed actions to facilitate professional transitions for workers at risk of unemployment towards opportunities in the defence industry, by fostering enhanced collaboration/cooperation within a broad learning and innovation ecosystem, including social partners and civil society, whilst preserving social dialogue and quality jobs.

1.12.

The EESC calls for a European whole-of-society approach to military and civil resilience and underlines the importance of civil society engagement, education, lifelong learning and civic participation. Citizens must see themselves as active participants in the defence ecosystem, whether in military or civilian contexts. The role of civil society will be fundamental here, since building confidence and public trust is crucial to the success of the Roadmap.

1.13.

The EESC highlights the specific circumstances arising from the situation in Ukraine and their implications for the transferability of lessons learned to the European Union context.

2. General comments

Arguments in support of recommendation 1.1

2.1.

Defence readiness has moved to the heart of the EU’s strategic agenda as the European security environment deteriorates. Europe’s ability to ensure its own security now depends increasingly on the strength, adaptability and credibility of its defence technological and industrial base and ecosystem, underpinned by societal resilience and social stability.

2.2.

The EU should move towards a more comprehensive defence readiness posture, including by ensuring that the defence innovation ecosystem is characterised by responsiveness, shorter development cycles and stronger interaction with technological advances originating in the civilian sector.

Arguments in support of recommendation 1.2

2.3.

In this context, the EESC, in line with of its position set out in opinion CCMI/253 on a Roadmap for European Defence Readiness, supports the adoption of the EU Defence Industry Transformation Roadmap as an instrument to advance these objectives. The Roadmap should contribute to strengthening the EU’s capacity to develop breakthrough technologies and to accelerate the integration of innovation into operational capabilities.

2.4.

The EESC further underlines that the implementation of the Roadmap should generate tangible benefits beyond the defence sector, as Europe’s defence readiness also depends on the continent’s overall industrial competitiveness and resilience. Its contribution to skills and specialised knowledge development, stable employment, quality jobs, the uptake of dual-use technologies and the development of critical infrastructure (including for military mobility) should also be taken into account as part of its overall impact.

Arguments in support of recommendation 1.3

2.5.

Industrial sovereignty and strategic autonomy in the defence sector are crucial, and must be pursued not only as an abstract ambition but as a set of verifiable strategic-autonomy objectives reflected in the industry’s transformation roadmap.

2.6.

Strategic autonomy must also apply to knowledge, including: financing and structuring of: advanced training programmes, re-skilling and talent attraction initiatives; technology transfer actions and scaling supported by technology centres; and the protection and development of European intellectual property rights in critical technologies (including dual use).

Arguments in support of recommendation 1.4

2.7.

The financial resources for existing EDTIB support programmes are already under heavy strain, with parts of the European Defence Fund having been reallocated to emergency tools such as ASAP and EDIRPA and to new initiatives like EUDIS. The proposed EDIP budget remains modest in light of its ambitions, and the EESC therefore also underlines the importance of advancing a genuine capital markets union to meet the EU’s defence readiness and transformation goals.

2.8.

Even under current funding conditions, a significant number of high-quality projects are unable to secure support under the European Defence Fund. The objectives pursued by the Fund remain central to the consolidation of European defence supply chains and should therefore not be deprioritised in favour of the Roadmap’s objectives, notwithstanding their legitimacy.

2.9.

In its opinions on EDIP (CCMI/203), the Roadmap on security and defence technologies (CCMI/189), Security Action for Europe (SAFE) through the reinforcement of a European defence industry instrument (CCMI/243) and the Omnibus on Defence (INT/1100), the EESC already called for an increase in the programme’s budget, noting that the insufficiency of current resources risks making the success of its objectives dependent primarily on the willingness of Member States to cooperate and invest jointly.

2.10.

In order to safeguard the achievement of their objectives, the budgetary allocations for existing EU programmes in support of the European defence technological and industrial base should therefore be preserved to the greatest extent possible.

2.11.

At the same time, the effective implementation of the EU Defence Industry Transformation Roadmap requires that the actions it sets out be supported by adequate, dedicated and sustainable financial resources. In this context, it is essential for the European Commission to evaluate existing instruments and prioritise those that offer the greatest leverage to deliver the Union’s political objectives in the field of defence.

2.12.

The EESC warns against financing the Roadmap through internal reallocations that could undermine existing EU or defence programmes, and calls for alternative funding sources. It suggests leveraging the European Investment Bank, national investment bodies, and private capital, and invites the Commission to explore the possibility of using Horizon Europe funds where relevant, while safeguarding civilian research.

2.13.

To avoid such issues in the future, it is imperative that the next Multiannual Financial Framework dedicate funding for the various defence programmes commensurate with the EU’s ambition in this field. Given its structural limitations, efforts to improve the coherence and impact of the EU defence pillar should primarily focus on making joint procurement more effective, by strengthening EDIP based on experience with EDIRPA and, in the longer term, by exploring the establishment of a permanent EU-level structure, platform or agency for joint procurement by Member States, with a view to reducing fragmentation, duplication and unnecessary costs, while enhancing innovation within the EDTIB.

Arguments in support of recommendation 1.5

2.14.

In recent years, the number of EU-level initiatives in the field of the defence industry has increased significantly, with a corresponding expansion in both scope and complexity. This evolving framework is further complemented by relevant initiatives developed in the NATO context.

2.15.

Several existing EU and NATO initiatives already pursue objectives similar to the EU Defence Industry Transformation Roadmap, particularly in defence innovation and support for new actors. At EU level, EUDIS and the EDA’s HEDI promote innovative solutions and tools for SMEs, start-ups and other non-traditional defence actors, while NATO’s DIANA and the Rapid Adoption Action Plan follow comparable innovation and capability goals.

2.16.

The EESC stresses the need for coherence and effective coordination between existing instruments and the Defence Industry Transformation Roadmap to prevent overlap and confusion. A well-integrated policy framework is essential for impact, particularly to ensure SMEs can easily access relevant programmes.

Arguments in support of recommendation 1.6

2.17.

Several key areas for implementing the Roadmap lie outside EU competences, notably defence procurement practices and the qualification of new technologies for national armed forces. These nationally driven processes risk remaining a structural bottleneck that delays the timely deployment of innovative defence capabilities.

2.18.

In this context, Member States should consider the establishment of dedicated procurement avenues for innovative defence solutions, with a view to reducing the time required for new products to reach operational use. This could include accelerated procurement tracks, pilot projects or pre-commercial procurement schemes adapted to the specificities of defence and dual-use innovation. However, to overcome the fragmentation of Europe’s industry, which undermines the EU’s defence readiness and transformation, the EESC calls for the EU to promote joint procurement.

2.19.

The EESC calls on Member States to develop a common framework for the qualification of defence products, simplifying specifications to reduce costs and speed up production. Greater convergence and mutual recognition of qualification processes would facilitate cross-border use of new technologies, under the European Defence Agency’s coordination.

Arguments in support of recommendation 1.7

2.20.

The inclusion of non-traditional actors is an important lever to accelerate the uptake of innovative technologies within the EDTIB. At the same time, the characteristics of the defence sector mean that the contribution of new entrants is most effective when carried out in close cooperation with established defence industrial actors.

2.21.

Greater agility in defence innovation depends not only on new entrants and niche expertise, but also on established industrial actors whose innovative capacity must be fully enabled through appropriate framework conditions. Europe’s defence innovation potential is rooted in a wider industrial ecosystem, including advanced machinery, electronics and cyber-secure systems operating in dual-use markets, which are essential to scaling new technologies. While the EU Defence Industry Transformation Roadmap rightly seeks to combine the strengths of new and established actors, it does not sufficiently spell out concrete cooperation mechanisms, which may constrain the achievement of its objectives.

2.22.

The EESC proposes exploring ways to promote structured cooperation between new defence actors and established industrial players, including through small-scale partnerships or consortia under programmes such as EUDIS and the AGILE pilot. It invites the European Commission and the wider defence community to consider additional formats that would foster early and sustained interaction between these stakeholders.

Arguments in support of recommendation 1.8

2.23.

Current EU programmes supporting the EDTIB are constrained by slow and inflexible procedures, which hinder timely innovation. Lengthy sequences of preparatory and administrative steps – from defining priorities and work programmes to publishing calls, evaluating proposals, signing grants and starting implementation – mean several years can pass between a project’s conception and the delivery of concrete results.

2.24.

The EESC welcomes the AGILE pilot’s ambition to achieve results within 6–12 months, but stresses that this will require substantial adaptation or overhaul of existing procedures. Any such changes must nonetheless fully uphold the principles of transparency, equal treatment and sound financial management.

2.25.

The EESC warns that sacrificing transparency, equal treatment and sound financial management for the sake of speed would erode trust in public institutions and ultimately undermine the Roadmap’s objectives. It also stresses that implementation must explicitly reflect the specificities of the maritime domain, align with existing naval capability development processes, and reinforce structured dialogue between industry, innovators and naval authorities so that industrial transformation genuinely strengthens Europe’s maritime security and defence posture.

Arguments in support of recommendation 1.9

2.26.

For many SMEs and new entrants, compliance with security requirements, including facility accreditation, IT security standards and personnel clearance, represents a major barrier to participation in defence projects. These procedures, though necessary, are complex, time-consuming and resource intensive.

2.27.

The EESC welcomes the Roadmap’s measures, such as promoting security-as-a-service, to ease compliance for SMEs and start-ups and support innovative products while safeguarding workers’ safety and working conditions. However, it stresses that these steps will not remove all entry barriers and therefore calls for further simplification and, where appropriate, harmonisation of rules and procedures, in particular greater convergence of classification requirements at EU level to facilitate cross-border cooperation and strengthen internal market cohesion.

Arguments in support of recommendation 1.10

2.28.

The European defence industry is currently facing a lack of industrial production and a significant increase in demand for trained and skilled labour and expert knowledge, as it scales up its production and innovation capacities in response to the evolving security environment. In 2024, the sector supported approximately 633 000 jobs, reflecting an increase of 8,6 % compared to the previous year. At the same time, the rapid recruitment of a substantial number of specialised personnel constitutes a major operational challenge.

2.29.

Several adjacent industrial sectors, notably the automotive industry, are undergoing structural adjustments driven by geoeconomic shifts and changing investment priorities, putting a significant number of jobs at risk. In 2024, workforce reduction announcements in the automotive supply chain reached record levels.

2.30.

In this context, the EESC supports the actions proposed in the Roadmap to strengthen skills development and talent pipelines for the defence industry requires coordinated action across education, research and industry, supported by instruments such as the Skills Guarantee, Individual Learning Accounts and micro-credentials. This should focus in particular on workers whose skills are transferable to defence-related activities, enabling rapid reskilling and upskilling in line with evolving needs. Enhancing the mobility of defence professionals through swift and consistent recognition of qualifications across the EU is also essential to ensure access to specialised skills, support cross-border cooperation and reinforce industrial readiness.

Arguments in support of recommendation 1.11

2.31.

A European whole-of-society approach to military and civil resilience requires the meaningful engagement of civil society as a cornerstone for trust, legitimacy and social cohesion. In an era of hybrid threats and growing interdependence between defence, technology and society, civil actors play a vital role in connecting citizens to institutional efforts. Education, lifelong learning and civic participation are key to empowering individuals to understand risks, strengthen democratic values and contribute actively to collective security. Only by fostering confidence, inclusion and shared responsibility can citizens truly see themselves as part of the broader European defence and resilience ecosystem and ensure the success of the Roadmap.

Arguments in support of recommendation 1.12

2.32.

Russia’s aggression has plunged Ukraine into a high-intensity war that has profoundly altered its legal and administrative framework, including peacetime rules such as standard public procurement procedures. In these exceptional conditions, several requirements that normally apply to the defence industrial base in non-crisis situations, for example on product lifecycle management or the long-term storage of equipment, are only partially relevant.

2.33.

The lessons drawn from the Ukrainian conflict can therefore not be mechanically transposed to the EU; instead, only elements compatible with the Union’s legal order and peacetime institutional framework should be carefully adapted to reinforce Europe’s long-term industrial readiness.

Brussels, 18 March 2026.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Séamus BOLAND

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/3232/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

Top