Commissioner for Defence and Space Andrius Kubilius told the European Parliament that the applications from Japan, South Korea and Türkiye to join the EU's common defence procurement instrument SAFE are still under assessment, with no decision expected until Member States finalise their national loan agreements and any budgetary leftovers become clear. The answer, given on behalf of the Commission, signals that the opening of formal negotiations with any of the three countries would require a Council authorisation under Article 218 TFEU and must respect the conditions set out in Article 17 of the SAFE Regulation.
The reply came in response to a written question by Renew MEP Engin Eroglu, who argued that cooperation with Indo-Pacific partners is a necessity for Europe's deterrence and supply chain resilience. Kubilius confirmed that the Commission is currently assessing the expressions of interest and finalising loan agreements that each Member State will sign with the EU. Only once those agreements are in place will the Commission have a clearer picture of possible budgetary leftovers, including amounts that could be re-attributed from national plans.
Policy orientation and institutional follow-up
The Commissioner's answer is procedural and cautious, avoiding any timeline or qualitative assessment of the three applications. It emphasises that any negotiation would require a Council decision, effectively putting the ball in Member States' court. The tone suggests the Commission is prioritising the internal rollout of SAFE before expanding to third countries. The next step is the completion of national loan agreements, after which the Commission will discuss with Member States the possibility of negotiating additional SAFE bilateral agreements. No specific date was given for this discussion.
Cleavage: EU integration vs. national sovereignty
The answer reveals a tension between the Commission's open architecture ambition and the Treaty-based requirement for Member State consent. On one hand, SAFE's design allows for third-country participation; on the other, the procedure under Article 218 TFEU gives each Member State a veto over any bilateral agreement. This could slow down or block the inclusion of strategic partners if some Member States object.
Stakeholder impacts
- EU defence industry: Positive impact if third-country participation brings supply chain diversification and economies of scale; negative if it exposes EU producers to competition from non-EU firms with lower costs or different standards.
- National defence ministries: Positive impact from potential cost-sharing and access to advanced technologies; negative impact from loss of control over procurement decisions and possible budgetary reallocations.
- Japanese, South Korean, and Turkish defence firms: Positive impact if they gain access to EU procurement; negative impact if negotiations are delayed or blocked.
- EU taxpayers: Positive impact if common procurement reduces duplication and lowers costs; negative impact if third-country participation diverts funds from EU-based production.