Defence Finance Monitor Digest #119
Defence Finance Monitor applies a systematic top–down approach. We start from the strategic, operational and tactical priorities as they are stated in the official documents of NATO, the EU and the governments of liberal democracies, and we track how these priorities are translated into funding lines, programmes and procurement plans, and then into demand for specific technologies, industrial segments and companies. In practice, we use these doctrines as a lens to identify which capability areas, technologies, companies and lines of research are being “lit up” as strategically relevant, and we map how this relevance materialises in concrete procurement, financing and industrial capacity, highlighting the assets that sit where strategy, budgets and capital effectively converge.
Our working assumption is simple: what is structurally relevant for NATO and EU strategy tends, over time, to become relevant also from a financial and industrial point of view.
On this basis, DFM functions as a decision-support tool, not as a conventional editorial product. For investors, it benchmarks deal flow against institutional priorities and highlights companies and technologies that solve concrete NATO/EU operational problems, rather than chasing thematic narratives. For entrepreneurs, primes and industrial managers, it shows which capabilities are moving to the top of the spending agenda, how to align R&D and product plans, and which funding instruments and partners are realistically available. For public decision-makers, it translates strategic goals into a structured picture of industrial capacity, innovation pipelines and supply-chain vulnerabilities. For universities and research centres, it shows where their scientific directions match urgent requirements and private capital, helping them position projects for both funding eligibility and effective real-world application.
In short, we translate strategic doctrine into an investable context, turning NATO/EU priorities into a usable map of technologies, companies and research lines that matter. DFM offers a common frame of reference so that each actor can read the same system from their own angle and act before decisions are forced by events.
Public Expenditure & Procurement
European Public Capital Flows to Defence and Dual-Use Technologies (EU Level, 2021–2027)
European defence is increasingly shaped not only by strategic declarations and threat assessments, but by the concrete allocation of public capital across the industrial and technological base. Over the past few years, the European Union has shifted from a largely hands-off role in defence financing to an active architect of funding mechanisms that direct grants, loans, and financial instruments toward specific capabilities, technologies, and supply chains. These public capital flows do more than support industrial output: they function as powerful signals to European private capital, indicating political priorities, long-term demand, and areas where risk is being partially absorbed by public institutions. Understanding how and where this capital is deployed is therefore essential not only to assess Europe’s defence readiness, but also to interpret emerging investment trends, de-risking dynamics, and the evolving relationship between public strategy and private finance in the European defence ecosystem.
Defence Investment Regulation
NATO-Allied Exceptions in EDIP and SAFE: How US Capital and Technology Can Enter EU Defence Programmes
Europe’s drive for strategic autonomy has produced a legal architecture designed to reconcile industrial protection with NATO interoperability. Within EDIP and SAFE, specific regulatory “manoeuvring spaces” allow controlled integration of U.S. capital and advanced technologies. The core objective remains reinforcement of the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base, yet official texts also embed a form of strategic exceptionalism for allied partners. The system functions less as a closed perimeter than as a selective filter aligned with collective security and operational readiness. Read together, sovereignty mandates and partnership clauses delineate the legal mechanisms through which U.S. actors can participate in common projects under strict conditions. NATO-allied status can enable narrowly framed derogations that convert potential veto points into regulated industrial cooperation. The resulting balance between internal asset protection and transatlantic synergy defines today’s practical boundaries in European defence procurement.
Full access is reserved for DFM subscribers.
European Security & Defence Industry
Emergence of SHORAD/VSHORAD Industrial Clusters on NATO’s Eastern Flank
Short-range and very short-range air defence has become one of the most structurally consequential capability priorities on NATO’s Eastern Flank, not only from an operational perspective but also in terms of industrial organisation and capital allocation. The proliferation of low-altitude threats, including cruise missiles, loitering munitions and unmanned aerial systems, has exposed the limitations of legacy air defence postures and elevated SHORAD and VSHORAD from auxiliary assets to core elements of deterrence and force protection. In Poland and Romania, this shift is translating into large-scale procurement programmes that are explicitly designed to couple military requirements with domestic industrial development, driving joint ventures, technology transfers and the localisation of production, integration and sustainment activities. As a result, the reinforcement of air defence on the Eastern Flank is no longer only a question of capability acquisition, but a process reshaping national defence-industrial ecosystems and redefining how operational urgency is converted into long-term industrial capacity within the Euro-Atlantic security architecture.
Full access is reserved for DFM subscribers.
EDTs & Dual-Use Technologies
Hypersonic Systems: The Challenge of High-Speed Maneuver
Hypersonic weapons are redefining the technical and strategic boundaries of air and missile defence by combining extreme speed with sustained manoeuvrability. Their emergence compresses decision-making timelines and challenges the core assumptions of existing detection, tracking, and interception architectures. This report examines hypersonics as a systemic problem that spans sensing, command and control, interceptor design, and industrial capacity. It situates the hypersonic challenge within NATO and EU strategic frameworks, where deterrence by denial depends on end-to-end control of the flight envelope. The analysis focuses on how mastering this domain has become a prerequisite for credible defence and strategic stability.
Full access is reserved for DFM subscribers.
Without a structured map of the linkages between doctrine, budget and capacity, strategy remains abstract, capital remains misallocated, and industrial readiness remains reactive rather than deliberate.