For much of the past three decades, Europeans have lived as if history had ended.
Peace, prosperity, and human rights were assumed to be permanent fixtures of the continent, guaranteed by NATO’s umbrella and the promise of globalization. That assumption no longer holds. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, growing cyberattacks on critical infrastructure, and the spread of authoritarian technologies such as mass surveillance and AI-driven disinformation have forced Europe to confront a simple reality: rights and freedoms are only as strong as the ability to defend them.
Yet Europe remains dangerously fragmented in its approach to defense innovation. While the United States channels tens of billions annually into advanced research and nurtures a thriving ecosystem linking startups, universities, and the military, Europe’s efforts remain scattered across national borders, with procurement systems that struggle to absorb new technologies.
According to Reuters, EU defense R&D spending remains less than 4% of total military spending compared with 15% in the U.S. At the very moment when rights are being tested on Europe’s borders, the continent risks falling behind in the very technologies – cybersecurity, drones, or secure communications – that will define the future of security.
Human rights and defense are not opposing poles but two sides of the same coin. Protecting open societies requires building a pan-European network for defense innovation. One that connects industry and academia with military end-users, accelerates promising technologies, and embeds ethical standards from the outset. If Europe can close its innovation gap, it will not only strengthen its own sovereignty but also ensure that the defense technologies of the future reflect democratic values rather than authoritarian control.
The Stakes: Human Rights in an Era of Strategic Competition
Europe’s modern identity is built on the idea that human rights and security are universal and indivisible. But today, both are under strain. The return of large-scale war to the continent, the proliferation of hybrid threats, and the deliberate use of technology by authoritarian powers to repress populations have exposed the fragility of Europe’s security assumptions.
After the Cold War, many governments assumed that economic integration and diplomatic institutions would be sufficient to guarantee peace. Defense budgets shrank; investments in military research and development stalled. The prevailing wisdom was that rights could be protected through international law and multilateral forums, not by tanks, satellites, or encryption protocols.
That calculation has been upended. Russia’s full-scale assault on Ukraine in 2022 has underscored that hard power, backed by advanced technology, still matters. Meanwhile, cyber intrusions have targeted hospitals, universities, and energy grids across Europe. Ransomware attacks on European healthcare providers surged by more than 60%, according to the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA), threatening lives as well as privacy. At the same time, authoritarian regimes have harnessed AI-enabled surveillance and disinformation campaigns to destabilize democratic societies from within.
Crucially, rights and defense are not opposing forces. A secure digital infrastructure ensures freedom of expression online. Protected energy grids guarantee the right to warmth in winter. Secure borders allow refugees to be received in an orderly and humane way. In each case, credible defense capacity is the foundation upon which human rights rest.
Public opinion reflects this growing awareness. A Eurobarometer survey found that EU citizens prioritize defense and security as the area in which the political bloc should most reinforce its position worldwide. This represents a striking shift from even a decade ago, when defense was often viewed as a niche or peripheral concern in European politics.
The conclusion is clear: defending Europe’s values requires more than rhetoric. It demands the capacity to deter adversaries, withstand technological threats, and adapt faster than those who would undermine its freedoms. Without a robust defense innovation system, Europe risks not only strategic irrelevance but the erosion of the very rights it seeks to uphold.
Europe’s Innovation Gap
The reality is that Europe lags behind both the United States and China in defense-related research and innovation. This is not simply a matter of budgets, though the disparity is striking. In 2022, U.S. defense R&D expenditure stood at over $180 billion; the equivalent figure for the entire EU was €3.5 billion, and year-on-year spending fell by €200 million.
The innovation gap is also structural. Europe’s fragmented procurement systems make it difficult for startups to scale beyond their national markets. Unlike the U.S., where a DARPA contract can propel a company into the defense ecosystem, European innovators often struggle with long lead times, complex regulations, and limited demand signals from ministries of defense. The result is that promising technologies stall in the “valley of death” between research and deployment.
The war in Ukraine has revealed both the risks and opportunities of this gap. Ukrainian forces have been forced to innovate rapidly, deploying drones, satellite imagery, and open-source intelligence in ways that traditional militaries had not anticipated. Much of the technology that has proven decisive – such as Starlink satellite communications and small commercial drones – originated outside Europe. This dependence on external suppliers underscores the strategic vulnerability: if Europe cannot supply its own defense technologies, it will always rely on others to guarantee its security.
There are, however, encouraging signs. The creation of the European Defence Fund (EDF), the launch of NATO’s Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic (DIANA), and the establishment of the NATO Innovation Fund (NIF) represent important steps towards a more coordinated approach. Yet compared with U.S. or Chinese models, these initiatives remain modest and dispersed. Without greater integration, Europe risks repeating the mistakes of the past: many initiatives, little impact.
Building a Network for Defense Innovation
Closing this gap requires more than additional funding. Europe must build an interconnected network for defense innovation – an ecosystem that aligns incentives, accelerates deployment, and embeds ethics from the outset. Three principles stand out.
From silos to networks.
Startups, established industry, academia, and military end-users must be more tightly integrated. Too often, promising research in European labs never reaches operational units. The U.S. model of “mission-driven” innovation, embodied in DARPA, demonstrates the value of connecting researchers with end-users early. Europe does not need to copy DARPA wholesale, but it does need to create mechanisms where innovators and military personnel can test, adapt, and deploy technologies rapidly.
Balancing speed and accountability.
Innovation in defense carries inherent risks: not every idea will succeed, and some may raise ethical questions. But Europe cannot allow slow procurement cycles to prevent adoption. Rapid prototyping, sandboxes, and cross-border testbeds, such as those piloted by DIANA, should become standard practice. Accountability must remain, but the bias must shift from risk avoidance to risk management.
Embedding ethics in innovation.
Perhaps the most counterintuitive point is that defense innovation can strengthen, rather than erode, human rights. Secure communications tools protect not only soldiers but also journalists and activists. Advanced sensors can monitor ceasefires and prevent escalation. Cyber defenses safeguard hospitals and schools from disruption. If Europe embeds human rights frameworks into defense technology development, it can demonstrate that democracy and security are mutually reinforcing.
Examples already exist. The EU’s guidelines on ethical AI provide a framework for responsible development. Similar approaches could be extended to defense, ensuring that innovation reflects democratic values rather than authoritarian practices.
The Path Forward: Policy and Practical Steps
Europe’s challenge is not a lack of ideas, but the absence of a coherent framework to bring them together. Several policy and practical steps could shift the balance.
Unlock capital and procurement.
Defense startups need clearer pathways into procurement. This requires streamlined contracting, dedicated funding lines for early-stage firms, and cross-border opportunities. The EDF is a start, but national ministries must also adapt their procurement processes to allow newcomers to compete.
Strengthen transatlantic cooperation.
While Europe must build its own resilience, it will remain stronger when integrated with allies. Coordinating with U.S. initiatives, as well as involving partners such as the UK, Canada, and Norway, can help ensure that innovation ecosystems are interoperable rather than duplicative.
Build common standards.
A shared set of ethical and security standards across the EU and NATO would provide clarity for innovators and reassurance for citizens. Without this, fragmentation will persist and trust will erode.
Highlight success stories.
Showcasing European defense-tech startups that have scaled globally can inspire confidence and attract investment. From autonomous systems to advanced materials, Europe has talent; the challenge is to connect it to markets.
None of this will be easy. Defense has historically been one of the most nationally protected sectors in Europe, tied closely to sovereignty. But in a world where adversaries coordinate across cyber, space, and information domains, no European nation can afford to innovate alone.
Human rights in Europe cannot be safeguarded by declarations alone. They depend on resilient societies, secure infrastructures, and credible deterrence. Defense innovation is the connective tissue between these elements: it ensures that open societies can withstand pressure without sacrificing their values.
Europe has the resources, talent, and institutions to build such a network. What it lacks is urgency. If the past three decades were defined by the belief that peace was permanent, the next must be defined by the recognition that it is fragile. Defense innovation is not a diversion from Europe’s human rights agenda; it is its enabler.
The decade ahead will determine whether Europe can secure its sovereignty, shape global standards, and protect the freedoms that define it. To take human rights for granted is to risk losing them. To invest in defense innovation is to defend them.
