NATO Dependency: Stifling EU Invention and Innovation for Decades

While the creation ofthe NATO Innovation Fund (NIF) is a welcomed development it is miniscule and nearly a century late.

This week the euro 1billion NIF made its first investments in future deep technologies. The NIF was created to address the need for enhanced innovation and technological
development within the Alliance. Launched at the 2022 Madrid Summit, the NIF
represents the world's first multi-sovereign venture capital fund, designed to invest in early-stage startups and other venture capital funds focused on developing dual-use emerging technologies in artificial intelligence, big-data processing, quantum-enabled technologies, autonomy, biotechnology, novel materials, energy, propulsion, and space​. It is good,welcomed, much-needed endeavour; however, if compared to the US, the fund is tiny in size and nearly a central behind the US.

Over the past 70years, many major inventions and innovations in the United States have stemmed from or originated within the Department of Defence’s (DoD) R&D efforts.
This emphasis on defence-led R&D has fostered a culture of invention and innovation across the country, yielding wide-reaching benefits and contributing to the perception of American exceptionalism in technological advancement, which many often do not realize is due to DOD initiatives. EU does not have this edge; can NATO be blamed?

The DoD's substantialinvestment in R&D has been a catalyst for numerous groundbreaking technologies that have transitioned to civilian applications. These
technologies enhance daily life and drive economic growth, but most importantly, they create an ecosystem for R&D, invention, and innovation.

There are manyexamples of US DoD’s R&D efforts leading to major inventions and
innovations that have ultimately been adopted for civilian use, benefiting the broader economy. The table below partially captures inventions and innovations out of the US Department of Defence.

For instance, thedevelopment of the Internet began with ARPANET, a DoD project aimed at creating a robust, decentralized communication network. Similarly, initially designed for military navigation, GPS technology has become indispensable for worldwide navigation systems. Advanced materials like Kevlar, initially developed for military protective gear, are now widely used in safety equipment and construction.

The robust funding and prioritization of R&D within the defense sector have helped attract highly scholastic thinkers, inventors, and innovators to the United States, creating an intellectual ecosystem centered around invention and innovation. This environment has enabled the cross-pollination of ideas and fostered collaborations that extend beyond the military into various scientific and commercial domains. The impact of this culture is evident in the wide array of technologies that have emerged from military R&D and found civilian uses, such as digital camera sensors, microwave ovens, drones, virtual reality, speech recognition, jet engines, computer networking, night vision technology, MREs (Meals Ready-to-Eat), satellite communications, AI research, medical technologies, robotics, cybersecurity tools, and supercomputing.

One of the primary concerns with dependency is that it can lead to complacency. The reliance on a powerful ally like the United States for defence and strategic support has often led European nations to underinvest in their military capabilities including R&D. This complacency stems from a sense of security the U.S. guarantees, diminishing the urgency for the EU to develop a robust, autonomous defence strategy. As a result, European nations have not only often lagged in defence spending and military modernization, but also in invention and innovation and it broader positive spillover into the general economy. Such complacency can be seriously detrimental to the dependent partner. It can and has led to the deterioration of the spirit of invention, innovation and scientific endeavour, thereby creating a wide gap between the dependent and dominant parties.

When an external power takes the lead in defence and strategic initiatives, it can stifle member states' motivation to innovate and take ownership of their security policies. The creative drive to develop unique defence technologies and strategies diminishes, replaced by a passive reliance on the dominant partner's capabilities and decisions thereby deterioating the critically imporant ecosystem of R&D.

Moreover, the long-term strategic direction of the EU can suffer from a dependency on the U.S. within NATO. The strategic priorities of the United States may not always align with those of the EU, leading to potential conflicts of interest and strategic misalignments. Overreliance on the U.S. can result in a loss of strategic autonomy, where the EU's defence and foreign policy decisions are unduly influenced by American interests and geopolitical calculations, which, as we have learned, are not always correct or transparent. This can undermine the EU's ability to pursue long-term strategic goals and respond independently to emerging global challenges.

While the NATO arrangement and the U.S. role within it have provided security benefits, they have also fostered a dependency that poses significant risks for the European Union jeopardizing the EU's long-term strategic autonomy, ecosystem of R&D and economic vibrancy.

As the global geopolitical landscape evolves, it is imperative for the EU to reassess its reliance on the U.S. and strive towards a more balanced and autonomous defense strategy, part of which is R&D which helps to build a much needed robust and vibrant science and technology invention and innovation ecosystem.

In the view of the writher, NATO's harm to the EU outweighs its benefits - How a robust defense department can have far reaching positive spillover, and the lack of it, e.g. in the EU, can have far reaching negative economic and social implications. NATO has been a setback of massive proportions for the EU.

Notes and Reference:

American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)​

Congressional Research Service (CRS)​

Federation of American Scientists (FAS)​

US Department of Defense

NATO