Startups need a clear path to working with the European Defence Agency

The 2024 Annual Report from the European Defence Agency (EDA) gives us many reasons to be optimistic. It shows a continent waking up to the need for more cooperation, faster and better innovation and more intelligent investment in security. But for all the progress Europe is making — and that shouldn’t be dismissed — it still lags behind the United States and China in one absolutely critical area: harnessing the power of startups.

For those who aren’t aware, the EDA plays a pivotal role in the continent’s security. Briefly, it identifies shared defense priorities, encourages joint research, aligns requirements across its member states, facilitates procurement and acts as a bridge or go-between between national forces and E.U. policymakers. No other institution, then, is better placed to coordinate Europe’s defense innovation strategy.

But if Europe is serious about competing globally — more saliently, if Europe is serious about defending itself — then the EDA has to do more to boost its startups. There are fast-moving, high-impact companies run and staffed by thinkers and doers from some of the world’s best universities and research institutions, who stand ready to contribute. Many of them are developing cutting-edge solutions, from autonomous systems to advanced materials — solutions that could transform European defense and infrastructure. Despite all of this, the path for these startups to engage with the EDA remains unclear.

I know this from my own experience. I am the CEO of FibreCoat, a German deeptech company specializing in high-performance composite materials. Our materials are already in use by NATO and allied forces, providing protection for spacecraft, decoy ships, dummy tanks and chaff for fighter jets. We move quickly, we work at the edge of material science, and we want to help. But even for us, with defense credentials in place, the process for working with the EDA remains opaque.

The numbers reflect this. In 2023, the EDA managed over 100 research and yechnology (R&T) projects worth 681 million euros (roughly $777.8 million). These concerned areas like missile defense, loitering munitions, electronic warfare and the development of a European combat vessel. That represents a step in the right direction, but it isn’t enough. The scale is far small to rival that of the U.S. or China, where public-private defense partnerships are far more developed.

In the U.S., 25% of the defense contracts go to small firms. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is an outstanding model of openness and ambition. It regularly publishes open calls, funds startups early and embraces high-risk, high-reward research. DARPA helped to launch what would become Waymo, the self-driving car company, through early investment in autonomous vehicle tech. All the while, European startups face a number of barriers: complex E.U. funding procedures, slow deployment, bureaucratic hurdles and a general sense of being shut out unless they’re already moving in national defense circles. Even key channels like the CapTechs (Capability Technology Groups responsible for shaping collaborative research and innovation) are difficult for outsiders to gain access to. These are expert forums where real influence is found and wielded. But unless you’re already inside the system, you’re unlikely to hear about the opportunity to contribute. 

Needless to say, this is a problem. Because Europe’s defense challenges today are not theoretical. They’re real, immediate and developing fast: some leading voices say that Europe needs to be able to deter a potential invasion in less than 18 months to stay safe. The war in Ukraine has shown the literally vital importance of improvisation, speed and response. Student-built drones are destroying tanks worth millions: decentralised, low-cost innovation by startups has changed the game. The rest of Europe must approach defense in the same way.

I want to make it clear that, though I have my criticism, the EDA is adapting. It has strengthened ties with countries like Switzerland, Ukraine, Norway and the U.S. It is supporting initiatives led by smaller enterprises through the European Defence Fund, (though it moves slowly and is targeted at the big players), and it has embraced critical areas like autonomous systems, energy resilience, satellite imaging, AI and advanced materials — areas where startups are thriving. These are welcome moves. But my central point stands: they’re not enough, and not visible enough.

So what exactly do we need? For one thing, a shift in posture. The EDA must take conscious steps to widen its circle and lower its barriers. It should publish more open calls, simplify access to CapTechs, create fast-track channels for startups with relevant dual-use technologies and host regular open days while proactively approaching companies within the startup ecosystem; it shouldn’t wait for the startups to come knocking. Most importantly, it should put speed at the heart of its procurement and funding models.

What should frustrate Europeans concerned with the continent’s defense is that we have a long and rich tradition of intellectual curiosity, free inquiry, creative thinking and world-leading engineering. Our talent is nurtured and shaped in world-class research environments that include some of the best universities globally. And yet, we are failing to make the most of these enviable advantages. A simple, well-lit path to defense is all that’s needed for entrepreneurs, engineers, innovators and others with dual-use or defense products to make their work serve the common good of the people across the continent. The landscape must also adapt by getting rid of the civil clause for universities and making dual-use a prerequisite for research grants. These are actionable approaches that policymakers could take immediately. If this can be addressed, the potential for transformation in European defense is enormous.

The European Defence Agency deserves real credit for what it has already achieved. It is bringing coherence to a historically fragmented landscape. But if it wants to be a true engine of innovation, it must meet us in the startup community halfway. That means working at our speed, speaking our language and building a system that rewards the very thing it needs most: fast, bold, experimental innovation.

I have contacted the EDA directly to explore ways FibreCoat can contribute more. But I believe that for the next generation of defense solutions to take root in Europe, we need a new level of openness and urgency. The stakes are too high for anything less.

Robert Brull is the CEO of FibreCoat.

SpaceNews is committed to publishing our community’s diverse perspectives. Whether you’re an academic, executive, engineer or even just a concerned citizen of the cosmos, send your arguments and viewpoints to opinion@spacenews.com to be considered for publication online or in our next magazine. The perspectives shared in these op-eds are solely those of the authors.