Markets 
The EU is investing €115 million, under AGILE, into AI, drones, robotics, quantum, and cybersecurity. The science in Europe is world-class. The problem is deployment, Europe cannot weaponise its breakthroughs at speed.
This is the blunt conclusion of new BCG research with General Lavigne, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Transformation. The debate is no longer about innovation, it’s about deployment.
“The Europeans have by far the most advanced publication and fundamental research, but the US, for the same technologies are much more advanced when it comes to patents and then obviously also to deployment,” says Nikolaus Lang, senior partner at Boston Consulting Group and global leader of the BCG Institute. “Europe is in the exploration world, and the US is in the exploitation world.”
The research paradox
Across every frontier, military technology, AI, quantum, drones, and telecommunications, European scientists are producing the world’s most advanced fundamental research. On paper, that should be a strategic advantage. In practice, it is being squandered.
The funding gap is hard to ignore. Over the past decade, the US invested $70 billion in defence technology venture capital. Europe invested €7 billion, almost one-tenth. American patents in the same technologies outnumber European ones. And deployment isn’t even close.
Europe is brilliant in the lab, slow on the battlefield. The US is turning European ideas into weapons while Europe lags behind.
Drones: the sharpest illustration
The gap is more visible or even dangerous in drone warfare. Before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, no European army had more than 2.000 drones. Both sides in the conflict are now burning through six to seven million a year. The quantitative shock alone has exposed the limits of European procurement.
The qualitative challenge is just as severe. “Drones evolve technologically every three to six months,” Lang says. “So, it’s also challenging to buy millions of drones that will be obsolete in 12 months from now.”
Europe’s procurement system, built for tanks and missiles on multi-year cycles, cannot keep pace. The vulnerability has deeper causes, core drone technology relies on Chinese supply chains, not European.
The contrast with the pace of innovation in Ukraine is stark. “Ukraine is innovating at wartime speed and Europe is still in peacetime speed,” Lang says.
The deployment machine Europe doesn’t have
The US has bureaucracy but also escape valves. Dedicated procurement units that move from pitch to contract in 60 to 90 days, with tech reaching the field within two years. Europe has nothing comparable at scale.
AGILE, launched in March with €115 million, aims to close the structural gap, not the science. The fund targets startups and SMEs in AI, drones, robotics, quantum, and cybersecurity. It joins EDIRPA, the EU’s joint procurement push, and ASAP, which backs ammunition production with 31 projects already running.
Lang welcomes them. But he is clear about what they are. “If you want to move a tanker, you need to set up a few speedboats,” he says. “And I think these are speedboats that allow some initiatives to grow.”
The tanker, meanwhile, is not moving fast enough. “Still 80 percent of European procurement is at the national level, 90 peercent of R&D is at the national level,” Lang says. “We need many more of these initiatives to overcome the fragmentation we see in Europe when it comes to defence.”
A decade-long fix
There are signs of movement. Defence primes are stepping up. Ministries are mobilising. The science is there. But building a sovereign European military tech stack is a generational challenge.
“This is a journey of five to ten years,” he says. “A lot of the European princes have taken on the challenge across all countries, but for me, I think this is a project of probably five, but more likely ten years.”
The missing link, he argues, is capital. Europe has the startups, the talent, the research. What it lacks is the funding pipeline to turn breakthroughs into battlefield assets.
“We need to mobilise more capital to support startups that are in Europe, that are doing great basic research, but that need to be supported to get from exploration to exploitation.”
Read the full article here
