Minutes of the First meeting of Group of Personalities
Bruxelles, 30 March
Commissioner Bieńkowska welcomed the participants and recalled the context of
the meeting – reduced R&D defence spending in the EU, undermining the
competitiveness of the EU defence industry, combined with the rise of new security
challenges and massive defence spending in countries like China and Russia. There
are already consultations conducted by the Commission and EDA with MS Ministries
of Defence but these needs to be accompanied at a more strategic/political level.
This is the rationale for the creation of Group of Personalities which needs to: (i)
make a strong case for an EU CSDP research activity to European and national
decision-makers and to the public. (ii) explain how an action at EU level can add
value to what Member States already do (iii) explain what this new research theme
should focus on. Following this introduction the Commissioner opened then the floor
for more general statements and comments regarding the vision of the work of GoP.
Mr Jorge Domecq (replacing Ms Federica Mogherini) – (i) the role of GoP should be
strategic advice, also taking into account issues such as governance and IPRs (ii)
the group needs to think also out of the box but we should not reinvent the wheel –
there are already tools existing in EDA, such as capability Development Plan and
Strategic research Agenda which can be used for the Preparatory Action (PA) (iii)
there is a need to work with public opinion, to make the case for CSDP related
research (iv) the profile of the GoP is diversified but it does not include users
(MoDs); this input would also be provided through the discussion and conclusions
coming out of the next Defence FAC meeting on the May 18.
Mr Klaus Thoma (replacing Mr Reimund Neugebauer) – there is a need to promote
European industrial base and strategic autonomy, otherwise we risk that the defence
industry will follow the civilian trajectory, with MS buying off the shelf products from
China and US. Also – need to focus on critical technologies.
Mr Nick Witney – clearly, something wrong is happening with EU defence
collaboration, only 10% of R&D budget is spent on collaborative projects. ToRs of
GoP could also refer to research institutes. Important to ensure that the EU funding
will not be used by the MS as a pretext for reduction in their own spending, therefore
it would be good if they co-funded CSDP research projects, in a form resembling
Joint Investment Programmes.
1
Mr Paul de Krom - future CSDP research shall facilitate and support EU wide
collaboration, with the focus on 4-6 TRLs, with a strong link to end users. PA needs
to be complementary to what is already in place, including in civil area (i.e. security
research under Horizon 2020). The governance of the PA should allow for a mixed
participation, involving variety of industries, SMEs and countries.
Mr Bogdan Klich – we need to build on the lessons learnt from the PA on Security
Research. It is also important to avoid confusion in the current plethora of different
documents addressing defence and research, there is a risk of lack of consistency.
We also need to recognize the achievements of EDA and involve it in the
implementation of PA.
Ms Elisabeth Guigou – need to approach Preparatory Action in the right context,
set by the Council conclusions referring to the need of pulling together capacities
and strengthening cooperation. The key word is strategic autonomy. PA is important
but MS themselves have to provide additional funding.
Mr Michael Gahler – there is a need for inter-institutional cooperation between the
Commission and EDA. HR Mogherini epitomizes this, as she combines
responsibilities of the Commission's Vice president with being a Head of EDA. We
cannot allow that MS reduce their defence R&D budgets - instead they should be
increased and the PA shall only play a role of a top-up with the focus on EU
priorities, not the national ones.
Mr Tom Enders – PA is a very positive development, but we can expect substantial
funding for defence R&D only in the next MFF, 2021-2027, it might be too late for the
industry. Every day defence industry is shrinking, there are practically no new
programmes with the exception of Poland. We shall also highlight the need for
security of supply and industrial consolidation which is still hindered by national
parochial considerations, same goes for exports across borders. We cannot focus on
research only but act across the board. As the next MFF will start to deliver in the
end of 20s, the focus shall not be on a gap filling programme but on future
technologies which are not taken into account in the current national planning.
Mr Antoine Bouvier – strategic autonomy is of key importance, as the notion of a
competitive EU industry that can deliver this autonomy. Therefore the report shall
address: (i) what is the objective of EU defence industry (capability provider for the
armed forces) (ii) what are the specificities of defence R&T (assuming TRL 4-6).
The answers to these questions will help to clarify governance issues, including
2
funding rules, IPRs, eligibility of different actions (including setting criteria for a
definition of European added-value), participation of third countries (on case by case
basis),dissemination of results and role of the EDA.
Mr Fernando Abril-Martorell – need to avoid overlaps with national programmes
and focus on complementarity. Only in this way the added value of PA and EU
funded CSDP research can be enhanced.
Ms Teija Tiilikainen – PA offers a great opportunity for a holistic approach and
consolidation of disparate research efforts. The focus shall be broad, not limited only
to immediate capability needs, fostering strong European economy and speeding up
cooperation and integration in defence industry.
Mr Mauro Moretti – EU is losing capabilities and markets, very few new programs
are in place. Today we are losing the game against the US, tomorrow it will be
China. The focus of PA and EU led research shall be on future technologies.
Commissioner Bieńkowska concluded the first tour de table by saying that:
PA and CSDP related research need to stand on two legs – the importance of
industry as a provider of capacities and research linked to security challenges.
The composition of the GoP on purpose does not involve end users (MoDs)
as these are already fully involved in the consultation process organised by
the Commission and EDA.
There is a clear compromise on the need for complementarity between PA
and national research programmes.
There is also a variety of views on the focus of PA, in particular there are
those who prefer the existing mechanisms for defining research needs related
to capabilities and those who think that the focus shall be on future (15-20
years) technologies that today remain outside the framework of MS planning.
Mr Bogdan Klich – we shall expect that June Council will go further than the one in
December 2013. On the scope of PA – perhaps we can enlarge the focus to political
aspects of CSDP, involving, for example, threat perception.
Michael Gahler – ToR shall make a clearer reference to CSDP missions, which
somewhat disappeared in the second version that was circulated by the
Commission.
Ms Elisabeth Guigou – we need to keep a political momentum, therefore it would
be good to organise the second meeting of GoP before the June EC. This meeting
could pass some important messages, for example relating to strategic autonomy
concept.
3
Mr Antoine Bouvier – indeed, strategic autonomy is the key, as it is linked to the
freedom of action, mastering of key defence technologies and security of supply. All
these concepts need to be reflected in the criteria for the definition of governance
rules and for the selection of projects.
Mr Jorge Domecq – it would be good to have sherpas set the roadmap with all the
important milestones leading to the launch of PA in 2017. In order to ensure the
coherence of the GoP's work, all issues should be discussed among the Sherpas in
plenary sessions (i) before splitting them into sub-groups and (ii) before
consolidating chapters on the basis of the sub-groups' inputs.
Mr Tom Enders – we need to know more about the R&D research ongoing in the
MS, EDA could provide us with the relevant information including also the existing
overlaps.
Commissioner Bieńkowska concluded on timing of GoP meetings and working
methods:
The report of GoP need to be finalised by March 2016. In the coming months 5-6
meetings of sherpas are foreseen, more if necessary. DG GROW will provide
secretariat and ensure the flow of information and complementarity between GoP
and the consulting process with MoDs led by the Commission and EDA. Originally,
the next meeting of GoP, to consider mid-term report, was foreseen for
September/October but, in view of the discussion, we shall try to organise another
one still before the June Council.
4