Europe’s defence industry struggles to keep pace with Ukraine’s wartime demands

Europe’s defence industry faces a growing challenge as Ukraine pushes its Western partners to move beyond conventional arms deliveries and toward joint production, technology transfers and industrial partnerships capable of responding more rapidly to battlefield needs.

Kyiv is increasingly seeking long-term cooperation with European defence companies, including the establishment of manufacturing facilities, licensing agreements and joint production lines. The shift comes as Ukraine faces substantial funding requirements for its defence sector, while the pace of technological change on the battlefield continues to accelerate.

According to a report by Euractiv, one of the main difficulties lies in the lengthy procedures surrounding European defence programmes. Some initiatives can take between five and 10 years to move from planning to implementation, a timetable that contrasts sharply with Ukraine’s rapidly changing operational requirements.

A European Commission official working closely with Ukraine’s defence industry acknowledged that the existing system lacks flexibility. European companies can continue manufacturing the same systems for years, while the nature of warfare in Ukraine can change within months as Russia modifies its tactics and as new technologies, particularly drones, are introduced.

Ukrainian defence manufacturers have reportedly told their European counterparts that they could significantly increase production if they received sufficient financing and firm contracts to expand their operations. European defence ministers have also signalled a willingness to accelerate the release of funds linked to a €90 billion European Union loan, following calls from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for financing to be made available sooner.

However, securing funding is only one part of the problem. Even when European and Ukrainian companies sign agreements on joint ventures or technology licences, turning those commitments into operational production facilities can take months.

Cooperation between Ukrainian and European defence companies has expanded particularly in the drone sector. Ukrainian officials argue that licensing agreements represent a shift from a model based primarily on weapons deliveries toward deeper industrial integration. Igor Federko, head of the Ukrainian Defence Industry Council, has estimated that establishing and bringing a comparable facility into operation could take at least eight months because of the need to train personnel and complete regulatory procedures in both countries.

European market access presents another obstacle. Ukrainian defence companies seeking to export their products to EU countries may face lengthy approval procedures, even though there is no blanket legal prohibition on such exports. European officials have also pointed to the regulatory and financial requirements that companies may have to meet before receiving authorization.

At the same time, Ukrainian defence products entering the European market must comply with EU standards and regulations. European Parliament defence and security officials have argued that some European military systems are highly sophisticated and expensive, raising questions over whether existing procurement models are sufficiently adaptable to the realities of modern warfare.

The debate reflects a broader concern over the structure of Europe’s defence industry. Some European policymakers believe that industrial capacity alone will not solve the problem and that political decisions will be equally important, particularly if governments are expected to commit larger sums to defence and accelerate procurement.

Ukraine’s experience has therefore highlighted a fundamental mismatch between battlefield requirements and European industrial cycles. Kyiv needs weapons, drones and other systems that can be developed, modified and manufactured rapidly, while European defence programmes often operate according to lengthy development, procurement and certification processes.

The issue has gained additional significance as Ukraine deepens defence-industrial cooperation with Western countries. The European Commission has moved toward closer coordination with Kyiv in the drone sector, seeking to combine Ukrainian battlefield experience with European industrial capabilities.

The United States has also maintained a cautious approach to transferring production technologies for some advanced weapons systems. In July, US President Donald Trump said Washington needed to be careful about granting other countries licences to manufacture American weapons and indicated that the transfer of production technology for systems such as Patriot missiles and Tomahawk cruise missiles had not been approved for Ukraine.

Britain, meanwhile, has discussed providing Ukraine with information needed to support domestic production of long-range weapons, including the Storm Shadow/SCALP missile family, reflecting a broader Western debate over whether Ukraine should increasingly manufacture weapons itself rather than rely exclusively on foreign deliveries.

Russia has strongly opposed the expansion of Western defence production inside Ukraine. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has warned that military infrastructure located in Ukraine could be considered a legitimate target for Russian forces. Moscow has repeatedly argued that Western arms supplies prolong the conflict, complicate diplomatic efforts and increase the direct involvement of NATO countries.

For Europe, the Ukrainian battlefield has become a real-world test of whether its defence industry can adapt to a conflict in which speed, flexibility and the ability to rapidly scale production are increasingly decisive. The outcome could influence not only support for Ukraine but also the future structure of European defence procurement and industrial policy.