Tell the EU you disagree with EU funding to military R&D (before August 7)

On June 7, the European Commission proposed a text to create a “Defence Industrial Development Programme”, which would divert €500 million of the EU budget over 2019-2020, in order to fund the development of new military technology. This is on top of the €90 million already granted for military research over 2017-2019. Our national governments and European parliamentarians will have to decide on this new funding, and the EC wants them to vote before end of the year.

We need your support!
Give your opinion on this proposal
before August 7

It is only by demonstrating that EU citizens are concerned about the plans that peace groups like ENAAT and the few dissenting voices in Parliament or governments can have a chance to stop this trend.

To force the Commission top take into account our feedback, we need to have dozens of responses from citizens to the consultation: each and every response is important! Please consider adding your voice.

HOW:

the feedback can be 4000 characters or less, and ENAAT has developed a template response for you to adapt as you wish. You can find this template feedback here.

Then you need to go on the special web-page the Commission has set up for citizens’ feedback: http://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/initiatives/com-2017-294_en

You will see the legal texts proposing this Defence Industrial Programme, and when you scroll down you will see the ‘give your feedback’ button.

Once you press the button, you will need to register under the “EU Login” system: it is a standard registration system and will not cause you the burden of spam in the future if you do not register for news, and the personal data are not shared with private companies.

Then you will access the feedback page: you can give your feedback in any EU language. You just have to insert your feedback in the text box available. You are then asked a few practical questions. At the end you can ask for your contribution to appear as ‘anonymous’ on the feedback website (all responses are public).

Read more on the EC proposal in the ENAAT press releases here and here

thank you for your support!

Citizens feedback template (PDF)

 

 

more news

“Security for Whom?” CSOs call EU leaders to move the money from the military to human security

Ahead of the European Council held on 18 & 19 of June, where leaders will discuss the next EU budgetary cycle, civil society organisations from across the spectrum urge EU decision-makers to reject the military budget surge and invest in human security instead Open Letter initiated by TNI, ENAAT, Stop ReArm Europe 17 June 2026 Dear Heads of States and Governments, In the run-up to the next European Council taking place this week, at which you will discuss the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF 2028–2034), with a view to reaching a final agreement by the end of the

Read more >

Who profits from EU subsidies for the arms industry and where they export: read our fact-sheet

Who profits from EU subsidies for the arms industry? Find out below which countries and companies benefit the most from the EU Defence Fund (EDF) and the Ammunition fund (ASAP), and where they export. More information and detailed data are available in the public platform Open Security Data Europe Companies European Defence Fund (EDF) After the first three years of the EDF, about a thousand different entities (companies, research institutes, universities, government agencies and a few CSOs) have received funding. It is clear that a large portion of the money goes to a small set of large arms companies.

Read more >

09/06 at 6pm: “Breaking the consensus on EU funding for rearmamament” online conference

ENAAT, GDAMS & StopReArmEurope invite you to an Interactive Online Conference***A militarised garden: Breaking the consensus on EU funding for rearmament * June 9 2026 at 18:00 CEST The session will begin from a practical observation: Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) who challenge the current policy direction -particularly the rapid growth in certain spending priorities- represent a small minority, which limits their influence. Against this backdrop, the discussion will move beyond simple opposition and instead focus on more constructive and strategic exchange, structures around two main pillars:1) Understanding the MEPs’ perspective:Why do many MEPs feel that there

Read more >