Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article examines the European Commission’s expanding role in EU defence, a policy field traditionally associated with member-state sovereignty, inter-governmental control and military command authority. It explains how, after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the Commission converted civilian-economic competences into defence-industrial steering capacity without acquiring command authority over armed forces. The article conceptualises this transformation as civilianised defence-industrial governance: a mode of EU defence governance in which defence-relevant outcomes are shaped through funding, industrial policy, procurement co-ordination, technological development, supply-chain resilience, and regulatory conditionality. Empirically, it compares the European Defence Fund, the European Defence Industry Programme, and Security Action for Europe Security Action for Europe through qualitative document analysis, and structured comparison. The article makes two contributions. It develops a framework for analysing defence governance through civilian-economic steering, and shows that the Commission’s post-2022 role has expanded by governing the conditions under which defence capabilities are developed, produced, and procured in Europe.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Samet İşbilen (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: