Aiming for a common defence research fund

By Andrew Beatty

Date: 09/03/06

Providing soldiers with better body armour or protecting vehicles from landmines is something that few defence ministers would quibble with.

This is particularly true for modern democracies with their sensitivity to military casualties - witness Washington's ban on filming the return of body bags from Iraq.

With EU forces taking on increasingly arduous operations, investing in research to develop ceramic body armour or better ways to detect chemical attacks appears to make sense militarily.

When defence ministers met in Innsbruck this week (6-7 March) they discussed using research on force protection as a pilot project to help member states overcome their reluctance to fund collective projects.

The European Defence Agency (EDA), still in its infancy, now hopes to create a fund for research into force protection, which would capitalise on the consensus on such an uncontroversial topic, so opening the door for member states to co-operate more in defence research.

According to EU estimates, pooling research funds increases output by something like five to one.

But today less than 1% of defence research, around EUR 100 million of EUR 10 billion, is done collectively and that is done on an ad hoc basis.

According to one EU official, conflicting budget cycles and differing political aims mean that an average time from conception to realisation for co-operative projects is currently around five years.

And what joint research is done, is done according to the principle of juste retour - what a member state puts in, it gets out, meaning national champions get the contracts almost regardless of quality.

Robert Walmsley, the former head of procurement at the UK's Ministry of Defence, once commented: "Every country in Europe is determined to make sure they are not being robbed blind. That is why you end up with work shares being calculated to the second decimal place."

The EDA hopes that a new fund for research into force protection can overcome some of these barriers.

Although it is likely to have a modest budget at first, by picking a subject that defence ministers universally agree upon, the EDA hopes to break the iron grip of juste retour and move towards a 'global balance'.

This, it is hoped, would also allow smaller firms to win research contracts and create greater competition in the market.

To overcome political hurdles the fund is likely to be voluntary, with contributions based on the interest of each member state, although minimum and maximum limits would ensure that no country dominates a project or buys a place at the table too cheaply.

Money would also be put up in advance, negating the problems of varying budget cycles in the national capitals.

According to Daniel Keohane from the London-based Centre for European Reform, an agreement on force protection would be another significant victory, following on from success in drawing up a code of conduct on procurement.

"This would create a joint defence research fund which we have not seen before," he said.

For now the EDA is holding its cards close to its chest. While the French government has argued for a research fund of EUR 200m, the EDA has shied away from talking figures, waiting to judge the political mood in the member states.

At their informal meeting in Innsbruck on 6-7 March 2006, EU Defence Ministers discussed using research on force protection as a pilot project to help Member States overcome their reluctance to fund collective projects.