Committee on Security and Defence Ordinary meeting
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
Offset
Transcript offset
Export
Live capture
Versions of this video
Transcripts may differ slightly from one version to another.
SEDE European Parliament
Follow its sittingsRasa Juknevičienė
As these technologies can access, transmit or control systems remotely. The draft welcomes the CER directive and NIS2, but implementation is lagging, and that lag is a vulnerability.
Another key element is the protection of our information space. The information environment has become a strategic battlespace. It must be treated as a security domain. Russia does not need to defeat us militarily if it can convince our societies that threat does not exist or defending ourselves is not worth the effort. Finally, the draft also underlines the importance of EU-NATO cooperation and the importance of supporting partners like Ukraine, Moldova, and the Western Balkans.
They are the testing grounds. We must help them and learn from their experience. Colleagues, the question is not whether Europe is being targeted. The question is whether Europe is prepared to respond. Europe must become faster, more coordinated, more capable, and more determined to act.
Thank you, and I look forward to working with all political groups to strengthen the report.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much, Rasa. So, now we continue and give the floor to the shadow rapporteurs and any other member who would like to take the floor. So, for S&D, Sven. Perfect.
Sven Mikser
Yes, thank you. Our shadow rapporteur is our good colleague José Cepeda, but unfortunately he is right now on his way back from the electoral observation mission in Colombia, therefore he cannot be here at the moment, but he asked me to extend his thanks and congratulations to the rapporteur for the draft presented.
He also asked me to convey on his behalf the following messages. First, despite the limitations on length, the rapporteur has included elements that the S&D group also considers essential to have a comprehensive picture of hybrid threats facing the European Union. We would like to highlight the information warfare and cognitive security as this is one of the dimensions that most directly affects our citizens, as well as critical infrastructure protection and collaboration with NATO and partner countries. As the very nature of hybrid threats requires us to work and collaborate together across different sectors and domains.
Of course, the cornerstone of this report will be the to highlight and substantiate the need to be for a coordinated operational and unified European response. Mr. Cepeda continues to work intensively with his technical team on the amendments he will table on behalf of the S&D group. In addition to contributing to the text presented by the rapporteur, he would particularly like to focus on the following aspects. First, hybrid threats occur when there is a multi-domain attack. Therefore, it is worth addressing also the classical or traditional domains: land, sea, air and space, and also cyberspace, and and concentrate on how hybrid attacks occur in each of them.
Secondly, cybersecurity is one of the essential vectors of hybrid threats. We need to address this sufficiently in conjunction with the issue of European technological sovereignty.
And finally, Mr. Cepeda would like to highlight and develop the all-society approach because resilience and societal cohesion are really our first line of defense against hybrid threats. Beyond the information warfare, Parliament can say a lot about how to protect and raise awareness among European citizens in order to create a new culture of defense in Europe. I would like to once again convey Mr. Cepeda's congratulations to the rapporteur and his willingness to make a balanced, comprehensive, and useful report together.
Thank you.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much. For ECR, Christian isn't there, right? Okay. Then we continue with the Greens, Villy.
Villy Søvndal
Thank you, Chair. Dear colleagues, hybrid warfare is becoming more and more apparent throughout our continent. Just last year, we saw drone incursions in the airspace of several European countries, including my native Denmark. I think this marks the beginning of a time where it will be increasingly difficult for us as Europeans to exactly pinpoint which hostile actors are trying to interfere in our countries. And that raises relevant questions because what is actually hybrid warfare?
Where is the line drawn? Is hybrid warfare about exercising covert operations to sow disunity within our member states and between our member states? Is hybrid warfare about consistent secret influence campaigns? Is hybrid warfare about coldly challenging the sovereignty of people? The draft of this report focuses a great amount on the eastern flank of our union, and it should.
The protection of our eastern flank is highly important with the aggression we now see from Putin and his allies. However, I believe that we must guard our union on multiple fronts. We have to acknowledge the growing pressure in the Arctic. We have to acknowledge that it is difficult to always recognize our good friends and allies. I would like to thank you, Rasa, for a very good starting point for this report.
I look forward to working with you and with my fellow shadow rapporteurs on drafting this report. Thank you.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much, Ville.
Is anybody wants to take the floor? Okay, so finally I give the floor to the rapporteur if she has any final comments. Rasa.
Rasa Juknevičienė
I just want to thank shadow rapporteurs. We already had the first meeting together before we started to draft the report. And I was very happy to notice, to realize that very many of us, majority of us, we are on the same page on consensus, on understanding the file. And also I would like to say that to finalize this report later this year will not mean that it's the hybrid will be over.
It's only the beginning of SEDE committee, in SEDE committee to evaluate, to start to evaluate and to follow the situation, to follow if our proposals, our recommendations will be fulfilled or evaluated. So this is a lot to do in front of us. The war is ongoing and we have to be much more prepared. So thank you again colleagues for your input and especially to our assistants, be it assistance from the committee or be it assistance from our political groups or be it our assistants as members of parliament.
Thank you really very much.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much. So we continue, dear colleagues. We now turn to the European Commission's follow-up to the resolution on drones, a new system of warfare. For this item, I have the pleasure to welcome Dinka Dinkova from the DG DEFIS and Fabrice Comptour, I hope it's from DG CONNECT. Perfect.
As illustrated by the battlefield in Ukraine, drones have become central to modern warfare. This has clear implications... Sorry, I'm a little bit...
And now I'm in time again, even I was too late. Hi, sorry. Good to see you, sorry. No, no, it's first. Excuse me, I was a little bit...
Yeah, okay. So excuse me. So again, welcome. As illustrated by the battlefield in Ukraine, drones have become central to modern warfare. This has clear implications for our defense and security, civil protection and resilience, and industrial and technological preparedness.
In this context, the European Parliament's resolution on drones, adopted in January, was very timely. It was led by the SED rapporteur Reinis, and it included many detailed and concrete actions to address the growing threat posed by drones. We have now had written follow-up by the Commission referring to work undertaken in several areas identified in the resolution.
This exchange is very important to ensure transparency, strengthen democratic scrutiny, and translate the Parliament's priorities into concrete results. So, dear Mrs. Dinkova, dear Mr. Comptour, sorry, I invite you to present an overview of actions undertaken by the Commission. You have the floor for seven minutes each, and we start with who wants to start?
I will start.
Dinka Dinkova
Please, the floor is yours.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair and honorable members. Thank you for this opportunity. First, we would like to thank very much the European Parliament for this timely resolution. It raises a lot of very important issues and very interesting ideas which the Commission has followed up in many instances in the action plan on drone and counter-drone security, which was adopted earlier this year in February, but also other actions that we have ongoing on many different fronts. Of course, I'm here representing DG Defense Industry and Space, and in my intervention, I would rather focus on the defense dimension of this action plan.
And with my colleague, we will provide the overall picture of all the actions that were outlined in the plan.
But perhaps to start with, I would like to really emphasize the context in which this action plan has been developed. We see a growing use of drones in modern warfare, an increasingly complex drone threat environment, which as the resolution very rightly points out, requires a strong European response.
We must learn from the experience of Ukraine, and we must learn fast. It is clear from that that drones are central to modern warfare, that the innovation cycles are incredibly condensed. Things are accelerating and the operational advantage depends on the ability to innovate quickly, to iterate based on feedback from the battlefield, to scale production rapidly and to adapt continuously.
So these are things we have to internalize in our own reflections of how we want to address our defense readiness. These developments take place in a in a broader security environment which we see is characterized by faster operational tempos activities below the threshold of armed conflict and closer interaction between civilian and military domains. So drones and counter-drone capabilities have become essential for Europe's defense readiness including our territorial protection and critical infrastructure.
The defense dimension of the action plan addresses the drone and counter-drone domain from three main objectives. It is structured around number one, supporting member states in their capability development efforts. Number two, accelerating innovation. And three, supporting industrial reinforcement and the ramping up of industrial production capacities. These are also key priorities which are outlined in the in the action plan.
These objectives ultimately aim to ensure that Europe can develop, procure, innovate, and produce the capabilities needed for current and future challenges.
So if I spend a few minutes on each of these three tracks, first supporting member states in developing capabilities. Already last year member states have identified drones and counter-drones as one of the priority capability areas to strengthen Europe's defense readiness and strategic autonomy.
Through the broader defense readiness 2030 framework, the EU has enabled a significant surge in defense-related investments, up to 800 billion, through different means: loans, incentives, greater national fiscal flexibility through the activation of national escape clause. A significant share of these investments is expected to support drones and counter-drone systems. One very important instrument, of course, is the Security Action for Europe, which provides loans to member states up to 150 billion for joint defense procurement.
So small drones, larger drones and counter-drone systems are all eligible and nearly 7 billion in submitted projects already target these capabilities. In parallel, we have the European Defense Industry Program where the Commission is supporting common procurement, ramping up industrial production capacities and providing collaborative frameworks through new instruments such as the European Defense Projects of Common Interest or the Structures for European Armament Cooperation. All of these activities could also support member states' efforts related to drone and counter-drones capability coalition and the flagship projects including the Eastern Flank Watch which was outlined in one of the previous interventions on the previous point.
The second track is supporting innovation and learning from Ukraine's battlefield experience. Through European Defence Fund already around 1 billion has been invested in drone and counter-drone research and development and additional funding is planned in the coming years. The EU Defence Innovation Scheme supports startups and scale-ups working on defence technologies including counter-drone solutions.
The Commission has also proposed a new instrument for rapid agile innovation, which is now being discussed also by this committee, and we had the pleasure to have an exchange this morning, to accelerate fast and cost-efficient defense innovation focused exclusively on new non-traditional players, SMEs, startups, scale-ups, which could support challenges for low-cost drone and counter-drone solutions. At the same time, we are deepening cooperation with Ukraine through initiatives such as the Brave1-EU.
We are connecting with Ukraine's Brave1 platform to help bring battlefield-tested technologies and innovation rapidly into European innovation ecosystems. We are also building stronger links between defense startups, scale-ups, and armed forces through something called U-D-I-S Tech Alliance, a network where we bring the actors together, a dedicated alliance focused on drones. Third and last track is supporting Europe's industrial base and resilience. Through EDIP, the Commission is supporting the expansion of production capacities for drones, counter-drone systems, and critical components.
We are also conducting an industrial mapping exercise to identify bottlenecks and capability gaps across the European drone sector and help address them more strategically and more systematically. And finally, the Commission is also preparing to launch an EU-Ukraine drone alliance, which will bring together manufacturers, innovators, startups, armed forces and end users from across the EU and Ukraine. And the goal is very simple: to connect operational needs with industrial solutions and accelerate capability development. So all these taken together, together with all the other actions that are outlined in the action plan, and my colleague is going to provide the outline, reflect a broader shift from fragmented efforts towards a more consolidated European approach that connects political ambition, industrial capacity, innovation and operational reality. Thank you very much.
Fabrice Comptour
Thank you very much. So the floor is yours.
Thank you Madam Chair. Thank you for inviting us in having the opportunity to present the action plan on drone and counter-drone security. As Linka just highlighted, there's been a lot of initiatives taking place on the defense domain.
This action plan is actually more the civilian internal security dimension, the idea being to contribute or to reinforce what has been done or what is being done in the defense dimension in a whole-of-government approach, trying to connect the dots. This action plan, and maybe I don't know who is just click, there is only one slide, so it's going to be...
This action plan has a scope of taking a look at the full continuum of threats, going from negligence, meaning a consumer being negligent in using the drone, to organized crime, to terrorism, to hybrid threats, and of course the defense dimension. We are looking at all type of drones, air, land, maritime, but of course there's a strong focus in the action plan on the air domain.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Could you send it afterwards? Okay, just for you, if you have problems, we will send you this.
Fabrice Comptour
It's sendable, of course.
So we, yes, I was saying that we are covering all, all type of drones, but with a strong focus on air drones. This action plan is based on four pillars: enhanced preparedness, boost detection, support collaborative response, and complement defense readiness. I will of course focus on the three first since Dinka spoke already about the, the fourth one. On the first one, the preparedness, enhancing preparedness, the idea here is to try to enhance our capacity to be resilient to drone threats. For that, the first point is to have a strong action when it comes to technology and ramping up industrial production, both from the civilian domain but the defense domain.
And here there are strong synergies with what is being done on the defense domain. For that we will look into the question of standardization. We will look at the question of mapping of capability, mapping of technologies. We'll try to direct funding where it matters. And all that through an industrial forum in order to involve much better the industry through the D-Tech forum that will be launched after the summer.
The second pillar, the second aspect is to make sure that we adapt the legislative environment that regulates the drones, the consumer drones, to the new reality and the new security reality.
These legislations are dating from 2019 and we want to make sure that, which is not the case today, that any drone that is flying can be registered, identified and tracked. And today this is not yet the case. We are also looking at the, that's the third bullet, making sure that whatever is put on the market in terms of drones is safe and secured and cannot be used as a vector of threat. So for this, we have of course all what we have been doing in the cyber domain with the Cyber Resilience Act that will kick in next year.
And also we are proposing to develop a coordinating risk assessment on the ICT supply chain linked to drones and counter-drone system with the idea to have a security toolbox in later on. We are also working on a EU-trusted drone label in order to make sure to inform the market on those drones that are safe and secured. The fourth aspect is a more law enforcement aspect, protection of critical infrastructure. As you know, we have the CER Directive that is protecting, putting some minimum requirements when it comes to protection of critical infra. We are working with Member States on guidelines which integrates drones, the reaction to drone threats, but also looking at voluntary performance requirement for counter-drone systems and supporting the training of law enforcement.
We have an expert group together with Member States on which we want to expand in order to work better to the integration of all the actions in this action plan. The other aspect is to make sure that we have a dynamic training and testing centers, and I see this was also in your report, in order to be able to qualify much faster the counter-drone systems, especially when it comes to aviation safety requirement.
For this, we will work with the JRC in order to upgrade one of the center we have here in Belgium, in Geel, as a center of excellence, which will be connected to a network of national centers of testing and civil-mil testing sites. We are also covering the maritime security aspects. This is linked to the other action plans we've put forward a year ago, with the action plan on cable security. And we are also tackling the question of the balloons that some of our member states are facing as part of a hybrid campaign clearly targeted at European member states.
The second pillar, going faster because I see the time is flying, is about detecting, boosting detection. Detection is the first element of being able, being able to detect, track and trace is a first pillar, first element to be able to then respond to an actual incident. Of course, traditional radars have some limitations, whether they are both military or aviation, civil aviation. That's why the market has developed multi-sensor system powered by AI and we want to foster that. We are also proposing to working on a new technology leveraging the potential of telecom network in order to be able to detect connected drones, those that are anchored to a telecom network, but also those that are not, the passive drones, through cellular sensing.
I would be ready to go more into the details if you are interested, but this has a strong potential in terms of military capacity as well. As to the third pillar, when it comes to respond, our first line of action here is to support member states in deploying protection for critical infra, protection and deploying counter-drone system through purchasing schemes into critical infrastructure that are designated by member states.
We want to work also together with the defense dimension on having a homegrown dual-use AI-powered C2 system, which is extremely important when it comes to actually operating counter-drone systems. We are also proposing to member states to have a yearly large-scale counter-drone exercise, and our colleagues in DG HOME are working on a counter-drone regulatory framework with the view to enhance these aspects for law enforcement. We are also exploring with member states, or proposing to explore, rapid counter-drone emergency teams as a solidarity element in case an incident can be foreseen or for large-scale events that are foreseeable. I will stop here and I will be very happy to answer any of your questions. We are right now starting the implementation of the action plan, starting especially with the detection aspect, but there are many actions that are being developed at the same time.
Thank you.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much. Now I will give the floor to the members for a first round of questions, starting with the rapporteur for the file, Reinis Pozņaks, for three minutes, and the coordinators for two minutes each. So Reinis, the floor is yours.
Reinis Pozņaks
Thank you, Chair, and also thank you, Commission, to response to our report. But I'd like to begin with expressing our appreciation for the remarkable complementarity between our report and Commission's drone action plan. When we drafted this report, our ambition was clear: to provide a particular blueprint for Europe's response to drone warfare.
And we are therefore encouraged to see that many of our recommendations are reflected in the Commission's work. We particularly welcome the Commission's commitment to strengthen civil-military cooperation, supporting industrial development, deepening cooperation with Ukraine, and enhancing Europe's resilience against drone threats.
Among the most important measures endorsed are the creation of stronger synergies between civilian and defense research, the upgrading of the Joint Research Centre's Living Lab into a counter-drone center of excellence, the stress testing of critical infrastructure against the drone threat, and the establishment of a drone and counter-drone tech alliance, and stronger support for defense innovations and startups, the stockpiling of critical drone components and raw materials, and the development of a drone and counter-drone security toolbox. We also strongly welcome the proposed drone alliance with Ukraine.
There is no better source of operational knowledge and battlefield innovation in drone warfare today. And Europe has much to learn and much to gain from deeper industrial and technological cooperation with Ukraine. Equally important are the plans to strengthen training, testing infrastructure, airspace coordination and certification frameworks. And these measures will help create a truly European drone ecosystem capable of delivering both security and technological leadership. However, there is one concern that I would like to raise.
It's no more future challenges.
When I examine the Commission's response, I see many strong initiatives, but I also see that most of them are framed within the 2030 readiness perspective. And that's where I believe we have a problem, because drone warfare is no longer a future threat. It's already part of our daily reality. Across the Baltic states, Finland and Poland, authorities are increasingly confronted with drone-related incidents around critical infrastructure, military facilities and sensitive sites. And in Romania, Russian attacks against Ukraine have already crossed borders, causing damages and casualties.
So the lesson is clear: drone warfare is no longer confined to the battlefield. It's already testing our resilience, our infrastructure, and our security here in Europe. So we look forward to continuing our cooperation with the Commission to ensure that Europe takes the decisive step necessary to address one of the defining security challenges of our time. Thank you.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much, Rainis. So now for EPP, the coordinator has given his speaking time to Nicolas. Coordinator, sorry.
Thank you chair very much.
Coordinator, sorry.
Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez
Thank you very much chair and thank you very much to the representatives of the Commission for the readout of such an important INA. I'm talking on behalf of Ignacio Zoido, who is the shadow rapporteur of the EPP for this particular INA. He's in Spanish, and then I will turn into my language. En primer lugar, quería agradecer a la Comisión Europea el trabajo que está haciendo para impulsar la industria europea de drones, no solo con la iniciativa europea para la defensa de drones o el plan de acción para la seguridad de drones y antidrones, también por priorizar la financiación para que los Estados miembros impulsen las empresas de drones en sus industrias nacionales de defensa.
Unos esfuerzos que sin duda repercutirán en una capacidad europea de drones sólida, efectiva y disuasoria. Precisamente unos objetivos que ya ha logrado nuestra vecina Ucrania y de quien tenemos tanto que aprender. Indudablemente nos separan realidades distintas, sobre todo la de un conflicto armado, pero nos une una necesidad urgente, la de defendernos. Si estudiamos y tomamos nota de la industria ucraniana, la Comisión Europea y los Estados miembros podemos aprender mucho.
En concreto, es contraproducente estar inundando a las empresas que se encargan de la tecnología de drones de I+D de la defensa en Europa con burocracia medioambiental innecesaria y solicitudes de permisos de testeo que se eternizan en el tiempo. Dos, es poco efectivo que la mayoría de los recursos financieros se entreguen en manos del gobierno y no de las empresas, especialmente de las pequeñas y medianas empresas que ya están desarrollando de hecho tecnologías de drones punteras y adaptadas a las necesidades del campo de batalla.
Si queremos detener la amenaza de los drones rusos, nuestra respuesta debe avanzar al mismo ritmo que el ingenio de aquellos que quieren atacar a la Unión Europea. Para ello, es hora de que pisemos el acelerador. En esta comisión SEDE siempre encontrarán una mano tendida para acelerar los trabajos todo lo que sea posible, tal y como nos está pidiendo el sector. And I add, we have to move forward at the speed of need. Thank you.
Sven Mikser
Yes, thank you. I'm not the shadow rapporteur, neither do I represent my group's shadow. I just speak in my own capacity. I think that Reinis very correctly said that this is not a theoretical threat of future. It's something that is here today.
And obviously we have demonstrated that we do have some capacity to deal with the small number of stray drones that might drift into our airspace from a neighboring country. Well, we also need to be able to protect our critical infrastructures against individual targeted attacks.
And we need to be able to deal with the threats to or disruption of the civilian air traffic by drone incidents. But these are very different things from this large-scale military scenarios. And even by conservative estimates, the Russians are today producing somewhere in the neighborhood of five million drones annually. And large proportion of those are strike drones. So my question therefore to the speakers is that where are we when it comes to our ability to defend against threats of the same magnitude that Ukrainians are facing every day?
Because there is no reason to believe that in any future potential aggression against EU or NATO country, Russians would not rely on the drones to the same degree they are relying on them in Ukraine today.
Petras Auštrevičius
Thank you very much for Renew, Petras for Nathalie.
Well, in fact, I am shadow.
I'm shadowing, yes.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Yes. Sorry, excuse me, a little bit strange today. So anyway, wonderful, please, the floor is yours.
Petras Auštrevičius
Thank you. Thank you, Chair, and indeed, once again, I think the more days pass after our initiative report initiated by Inese Vaidere, I mean, the more we see practical impact of that report and especially following the practical response on which we hear reporting from the DGs responsible of the European Commission. And this is very good exercise, Madam Chair, I would encourage only to have more reporting back on this most important issue in coming months and years.
Probably it must become a kind of traditional reporting exercise because situation is changing very, very rapidly and we have to be up to the speed of all those changes. I'm in competition with somebody.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much.
No, no, I know. Please, Michael. Please, okay, continue.
Petras Auštrevičius
Very good. Thank you. My question to the DG's representatives would be how you would assess the response from member states, because member states are those actors who have to take up all the initiatives and follow up and use all the financing instruments made available and provided to them. What kind of the, I would say, I mean, progress picture you see for the time being? Are you happy?
Is that even across across member states? What can be done in order to encourage more cooperation in this regard and how those partnerships, cross-border partnerships and regional partnerships develop from your point of view? Another point is training. I think drones themselves don't fly. I mean, they have to be managed.
All right? I mean, we still speak about a corps of operators. I mean, the smarter they are, the better usage of drones we can expect. How about training?
Will be any special programs on EU level in order to encourage all those training exercises? And finally, you know, drones are can be applicable and they can be used in many, many fields, not just in a warfare, but in civil protection, for example, against fires, even search and rescue, border guarding and so on and so forth. Is there any anything of this kind on EU level programs or initiatives we can see in coming years? Thank you.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much, Petras. So let me see. Villy, the floor is yours.
Villy Søvndal
Thank you very much. Yeah, nature of war is changing extremely rapidly just now.
There's a kind of shift of paradigm. And therefore I think maybe we should also discuss the way resources are allocated just now. It's like the next war is always prepared from the experience from the previous war. But this is for sure not the case just now. I think there are three theaters which are interesting.
One is what's going on by the front. What's going on now with the combination of drones, of laser, of robots, of IT, of AI, is a completely new way of warfare by the front. What's happening in deep strikes, for example today, Ukrainians attacked oil and gas facilities in Saint Petersburg.
And they also hit the Russian fleet in Saint Petersburg. It was all done by drones. And the third theater is of course the defense when we are attacked from outside with drones. I think we should prepare for all these three theaters, but I think also we should raise the fundamental question: are the member states investing in the right way?
Do they need some advice? Do we need some common plan to secure that the role that drones play is also reflected in the way money is spent in Europe compared to warfare? And just about capacity. When we visited last Ukraine, we were told that there's a lot of unused capacity in Ukraine to produce.
Could we not accelerate this capacity being used? I mean, you mentioned also the cooperation with states in Ukraine in co-production, but could we get even further, go even further that way? And then I heard, which I think it's a bit worrying, that of the investments coming from outside, 20% is coming from Europe and 70% from US. It's like maybe they better understood where all the future possibilities with military production is. Can we do anything to play a bigger role from Europe?
Thank you.
Dinka Dinkova
Yes, I can maybe start with a few points and Fabrice will complement. I would like to start with the 2030 perspective. This is the political agenda we have today, our defense readiness 2030. It's clear that these threats are very real, they happen every day, but the policy framework is what we have.
It doesn't mean that we are waiting for 2030 to start working and be active. On the contrary, there has been a lot of ambition, a lot of enthusiasm also on the part of the member states. We see clearly the need to ramp up our capabilities and be ready to react within the 2030 framework, be ready to react even earlier if the crisis arises. So this is the whole logic. For that, the Commission has put in place different instruments.
Some of them like EDIRPA are emergency instruments that they were meant to meet the most immediate capability gaps that Member States have. For that, they can procure a capacity from even outside of the EU within certain limitations obviously, but we are not going to wait that we have the capacity in Europe in order for Member States to get these very needed defense products and defense capacities. Then we have more long-term programs like the European Defense Industry Program with different kinds of logics and instruments to support industrial ramp-up.
and we are providing a lot of incentives to member states to ramp up production capacities, to look into supply chain bottlenecks, to maybe go resort to certain reserves of critical components or critical materials and and design and craft strategies to react in crisis situations, for example through the whole security of supply regime. And then we have innovation instruments, first research and development instruments and innovation instruments that look more into the longer term horizon.
Into the longer-term horizon, do we have, are we prepared to have the technologies for the warfare of tomorrow? And this is where we're investing in strategic enablers like use of AI in defense, for example. With the new instrument Agile, we have a new, very flexible program to immediately, within a very short timeframe, implement defense innovation into the armed forces of the member states. Develop the challenges together with the member states, but also ensure that whatever comes out in terms of technologies and products from this program ends up where it is mostly needed on the ground, on the battlefield. So I think that the 2030 framework is a policy framework, but the actions that we have are really multidimensional and multilayered in terms of timeframe.
Then you also asked about whether member states are reactive. I think they are. But we have to be clear that in terms of capability developments, this is the role of the member states. The Commission is there to support, to incentivize, to stimulate, to provide with whatever competences we have to provide the support that they need, whether this is financial support, policy framework or or regulatory measures where needed, but we are in a supporting role.
So Member States have taken this topic of drones and counter-drones very seriously. We see that in the context of the priority capability area coalition on drones and counter-drone systems, extremely active, with a number of Member States in the lead, but it is a very broad coalition of 28 countries working together to design common procurement actions, industrial ramp-up, common research and development actions to meet the challenges of the future. So I think Member States in this domain are very active and we come in support with the instruments we have. This large-scale EDPCIs is one element, but there are other programs that we can put in motion.
And final words from me, the private investments. You did mention that a figure 20% comes from the outside of Europe. I'm not sure if this is entirely correct but we have to be critical and say that today private investment in Europe particularly for the scale up companies is not primarily European. It comes, companies we have a lot of funding opportunities, private funds, equity funds when companies are small, only starting. And then when they need the financial firepower to grow, scale up production and then they have they meet certain difficulties.
And this is also one area where, including in EDIP, we have put in place this FAST fund to support the transformation of supply chains in defence. We're working with the European Investment Bank to come forward with a fund of fund for defence, for particularly growth companies. It will be probably operational later this year, we're at the final stages of discussion. So we need to to mobilise the whole financial firepower of the private financial ecosystem because the private the public money alone will not be enough to take us where we have to be, defence-ready by 2030.
Fabrice Comptour
Thank you and first thanks a lot for all your comments. I have to say that your report has been an inspiration to many of the work we've done on the action plan. So thanks a lot for that and there's no surprises that you see some some links to it. Actually to your question on the immediacy or the fact that we need to act immediately, the action plan is part of the answer. And that's the idea was to mobilize efforts right now in a domain at least when it comes to civilian security dimension in a domain that is strongly linked to national security.
So a bit like what Dinka said, we are here to support, we are here to promote, to push, but in the end the member states have to decide and take it up. And to the question whether the member states on the action plan have been, what was the reaction? I've been presenting the action plan and discussing with member states now for almost two, three months, and I have to say the reaction is really positive and I see a willingness to commit, a willingness to implement.
So I'm confident on the capacity that most of the actions will be deployed at some point and rather fast than longer term. However, some needs to be a bit some rethinking also with them and that's the whole purpose, including with you, to see how we can make them evolve to make them even more relevant towards what compared to what we have set. We are fully aware that there is an exercise of also back and forth of discussion in order to make sure that this is really fitting what is needed. I thanks in particular your good words on the action plan when it comes to the focus on protection of critical infra. I think this is what we had in mind, really much looking at the critical infrastructure protection.
We've seen that even if we are not in a scenario like in the Ukraine case or Ukraine war, war in Ukraine, sorry, the protection of critical infra are subject to hybrid threats. And this is why we need to have clear protection mechanism when it comes there. This is brings immediately the question of Civ-Mil cooperation. This is not an easy subject in Member States depending on how Member States are organized, but this is a topic that needs to be discussed.
And this is, I think, one of the added value of this action plan is to put this on the table and to start a discussion around that. And that's why I want to emphasize the importance, I think, we think in the Commission, of the large-scale counter-drone exercise. Because this is where we want to test the protocols between the civ and the mil when there is an incident, but also our capacity to react, for instance, to a swarm attack on a drone. You said you need pilots, but one pilot doesn't have to pilot only one drone now. He can pilot many drones.
And that's a completely shift in terms of threats we need to look at. So this is something that is really much understood, is really something that we are working on. When it comes to air traffic, clearly, I think what is important to see is that it was important that we are increasing the capacity to identify legitimate use of drones. Many of the drones that are flying today are legitimate. The problem is that we don't necessarily see them because they are not registered, they are not identifiable.
So we want to fix this so whenever there's something flying, the law enforcement can focus on the foes and can actually knows where are the friends. And this discrimination is very important in order to focus the mind and focus the efforts in terms of response.
So that's why the drone security package is very important in our opinion in order to level up the minimum level of security when it comes to commercial use of drones. When it comes to the speed of implementation, I would like to highlight the fact that we are in the process especially of launching a call for expression of interest on the deploying the cellular-based drone detection.
The idea here is to ask Member States concrete projects where they could deploy these technologies, whether for connected drones or unconnected drones, based on cellular sensing, and to see to which extent we can test and deploy, because we are lucky in Europe, we have telco suppliers that are able to do that. We should leverage this, and that's why we are proposing Member States to test that. We hope to get responses from Member States, on this basis have a discussion with them and find a way to support financially these tests and these deployments.
I think it's a very interesting and I'm insisting on that because I believe this can be quite a step change when it comes to the capacity to detect what is flying over our critical infrastructure or over a broader region. I think I will stop there. Maybe one word on production. What is interesting is what we see and this is where we see civil-military interaction. You see some startups from defense looking capacity of producing and teaming up with automotive industry.
This is a very interesting move and this is something that when it comes to the industrial forum we would like to see how we can foster because we in Europe we are an industrial continent. We know how to how to produce in mass several industrial products. And having the defense industry teaming up with let's say the car industry but you could also mention other industries this is I think the way to go. So we will that's what I wanted to ask about it.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much. We have two more questions. First, Michael Šerba.
Michael Šerba
Good afternoon to everybody. Thank you for the presentation on action plan and of course integrating drone defense into strategic dual-use infrastructure under the military mobility framework requires a highly structured alignment with EU transport and defense regulations and our committee is working on this regulation and me as a as a rapporteur.
So we will present to the Commission some new proposals also in this in this field. Let me ask you two questions. First, should the EU treat drone resilience and counter-UAS capabilities as a core element of military mobility, particularly along strategic corridors and around dual-use infrastructure?
What concrete steps will the Commission table to ensure that civilian and military authorities develop this interoperable systems to develop, to detect, identify and neutralize such threats while preserving the safety and continuity of civilian airspace? So thank you very much and take into consideration this military mobility and our work on this. Thank you.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much. Maybe you could answer immediately, once too, please.
Dinka Dinkova
Yes, I will not be very detailed in my answer. I would just say that the Commission has adopted this military mobility package, and the aspects that you were discussing are also addressed in that. It's now in the co-decision negotiations, so we hope that this will be finalized very shortly. But for sure, there is a need to bridge these regulatory gaps between the civilian and military uses and foster interoperability. And this is something that the Commission takes into account in our reflections.
Thank you.
Christophe Gomart
Thank you, Marie-Agnes.
Thank you for your assessment and your insights. A question about procurement. Are we not preparing for tomorrow's wars with procurement procedures designed for yesterday's world? In the drone sector, how can we drastically shorten decision-making and acquisition timelines so that innovation can keep pace with the realities of the battlefield? And I'm fully agree with automotive industries as Fabrice Quémard said just previously, of course.
Dinka Dinkova
Okay. Okay, so just a few words on the procurement. We see that this industry is transforming, defense industry is transforming. Innovation cycles are accelerating, we need to be much more rapid, much more agile, be able to integrate feedback directly from the battlefield.
We see that especially in drones and counter-drone systems, this is essential and we see that one of the main lessons to be learned from Ukraine. It will be too black and white to say that our procurement procedures are outdated. It is a fact, but we also see that things are changing. We see that in some member states, defense innovation agencies are being created where they were not before, that they're putting in place new and much faster ways to procure, particularly innovative, cost-effective, off-the-shelf solutions, sometimes taking much more risk to integrate also civilian technologies and civilian products, which would allow greater reactivity and speed.
With the agile instrument, the Commission is also proposing something new with this idea again that we need to be faster, we need to be much more prone to risk-taking in the defense sector, that we need to team up with civilian industries, particularly Fabrice mentioned in areas where we have production bottlenecks, and there are industries like automotive but maybe others that have spare production capacity, so this kind of collaboration is particularly important for creating a vibrant industrial ecosystem.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much, Rainis, as rapporteur, you want to add something? Okay, you won't.
Michael Šerba
Just thanks to all colleagues for the good questions and good answers. Thank you.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Very clearly to us, to tell us what's going on, because you could see it's very important and we could see what's going on. So thank you very much for your time. And colleagues, let me see. Yes, we have in 15 minutes coordinators' briefing. And then we continue at 6:30 with the Foreign Minister of Lithuania.
Thank you very much.
Speaker 25
Good morning, everyone. I would like to welcome you to this meeting of the Subcommittee on Security and Defence. I would like to start by asking you to check that you have your voting cards with you. And I would like to remind you that the meeting is being webstreamed. The first item on our agenda is the adoption of the agenda.
The draft agenda has been circulated. Are there any comments or objections? I see none. The agenda is adopted. The second item is the Chair's announcements.
I have no specific announcements to make today. The third item is the approval of the minutes of the meeting of the 14th of February 2024. The minutes have been circulated. Are there any comments or objections? I see none.
The minutes are approved. We now move to the main item on our agenda today, which is an exchange of views on the security situation in the Red Sea.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.