France, Czechia and Hungary still await EU approval for security action defence loans. On Thursday, the European Commission said that each of the lagging applications moves separately and has stressed with a dose of optimism that the talks are not subject to political horse-trading.
The European Commission takes pride in the speed at which its new Security Action for Europe lending scheme has moved from concept to cash. In nine months it has waved through 16 national plans worth €112bn and lined up a first disbursement for April. Yet three heavyweight files—France, Czechia and Hungary—remain stuck in the pipeline. At the midday press briefing on 12 March the Commission’s spokesman, Thomas Regnier, tried hard not to spook either markets or member states.
SAFE, a €150bn facility adopted last May lets governments borrow on Brussels’ triple-A rating to refill emptied ammunition stocks and place bulk orders for drones, air-defence and other kit. The logic sounds unimpeachable: Europe arms Ukraine, then patches its own armoury in lock-step, boosting the continent’s defence industry in the process. The slow-coaches therefore stand out. The spokesman faced a volley of questions about their progress.
Czechs and balances
Asked first about Budapest, Mr Regnier kept his tone neutral. “Indeed, no approval at this stage of the Hungarian SAFE Plan. Work is ongoing. We’re, of course, in touch with the Hungarian authorities in view of approving it in the future.” Hungary’s €17bn request is under special scrutiny because the country remains entangled in an EU rule-of-law procedure that can freeze funds if graft risks loom.
Pressure is lighter on Paris and Prague. Both turned in voluminous dossiers in January. Their plans focus on missile defence, artillery lines and the replacement of Soviet-era vehicles. Yet they too await the Commission’s blessing.
You might be interested
Mr Regnier reminded reporters that every file moves at its own pace. “For the three remaining plans, Czech Republic, Hungary and France, there is no link between the plans. So we’re really dealing with these on a case-by-case basis with each member state.”
That disavowal of horse-trading matters. France wants its plan signed before an April Franco-German summit. Czechia, until recently a vocal backer of Ukraine, is to seal contracts for 155 mm shells within weeks. Hungary is different: several Nordic and Baltic governments fear that unconditional approval would reward Viktor Orbán’s obstructive tactics and set a dangerous precedent.
Slips of paper, piles of shells
Mr Regnier tried to keep everyone on board. “We’re trying to move as swiftly as possible because the approval of these plans by the Commission and the Council really is the main priority, of course, because of international developments, it is important to shore up European security and defence.”
Money will not flow until signatures are dry. For the 16 green-lit plans, each capital must strike a separate financing agreement with the Commission. That paperwork will “probably” unlock cash in April, said the spokesman, adding with a touch of understatement that “you’d have to wait a bit more”. Defence ministries keen to place orders before the next winter campaign now watch the calendar nervously.
For some of the plans, the amounts are not in line with what was originally approved by the Commission. Some tweaking needs to be done. — Thomas Regnier, European Commission spokesman
Why, then, the hold-up? The spokesman cited nuts-and-bolts issues rather than political rows. “For some of the plans, the amounts are not in line with what was originally approved by the Commission. Some tweaking needs to be done. For some of the plans, we are missing some information, so we’ve asked for additional information.” On France he struck a conciliatory note: “We have a very good partnership with the French authorities and we’re working very closely with them on their plan.”
Pörkölt gone bad
He stressed that rejection was not on the table. “We haven’t rejected any of the plans at this stage of the game. We simply need to look into a little bit more detail and get some additional information before we can approve the plan.” That phrasing sought to reassure investors, prime contractors and nervous governments alike that SAFE remains on schedule—even if the schedule is now tight.
Behind the technocratic language lurks a legal quarrel. Budapest’s rule-of-law dossier, first opened in 2022, obliges the Commission to certify that new loans will not feed corruption. Officials say privately that auditors flagged public-procurement risks in the draft Hungarian plan. Mr Regnier offered no such detail. His caution reflects a broader Commission strategy: keep criticism procedural, not political, to avoid giving Mr Orbán ammunition for his domestic narrative of Brussels tyranny.
France and Czechia pose no similar headache but do stretch the SAFE envelope. Their combined requests are worth over €38bn, almost a third of the facility. Other member states want assurances that big borrowers will not crowd them out later. The Commission answers that unused headroom remains ample and notes that early movers create economies of scale for all.
From concept to credibility
Time, nevertheless, presses. EU manufacturers warn that without advance payments in the second quarter their pledge to triple shell output by 2027 will slip. Senior diplomats argue that every month of delay weakens deterrence on NATO’s eastern flank. The Commission insists that the Council can adopt implementing decisions within four weeks of receiving a clean file. That still leaves lawyers racing the clock.
Success would lift the approved share of SAFE to roughly two-thirds and show that even fiscal hawks such as Paris will pool borrowing when strategic stakes rise. Failure would expose the limits of Brussels’ new security ambition. Ukraine’s supporters in the European Parliament already grumble that conditionality clashes threaten Europe’s credibility as an arsenal for Kyiv.
Mr Regnier hopes it will not come to that. His words aimed to drain drama from the process. “Work is ongoing,” he said. Few in the room doubted the truth of that. The question is whether the work finishes before geopolitics moves on.
