Main headlines from this issue

“Norway must define its own national security interests”

The relevant subcontracting provisions in the directive will not be implemented anytime soon. Norway will define its own national security interests and the measures necessary to protect those interests within the scope of Article 123.

Another showdown looms as Denmark submits new offset bill to parliament

Denmark is in close dialogue with the EC over interpretations of the defence directive but significant differences remain. Without a resolution a new bill now before parliament would turn the current regulations into guidelines, and programmes would become less transparent.

Belgium: subcontracting requirements leave much to be desired

Not all industries from EU Member States may enjoy equal opportunities and it is not clear that subcontracting requirements produce increased involvement of SME’s in supply chains. Belgium feels that not allowing offset requirements in EU Member States creates competitive disadvantages for EU industry.

How the EC blackmailed the Czech Republic

Czech offsets guidelines were not governed by statute but by a framework document known as a resolution that allows for considerable adaptability in their application. In the Czech government’s opinion, no legislation was needed to implement the defence directive. It just required taking a different approach.....

Switzerland: “the directive is discriminatory”

“We think the directive is discriminatory,” said a lawyer with Armasuisse. “Abolishing indirect offsets is maybe creating more [of a] mess. It is not helping industry.”

Finland’s new approach to Industrial Participation

Finland, like other regional countries, is relying on the argument that it is essential in certain areas to have local industrial support to safeguard defence and security capability. New Finnish legislation does not include any provision on industrial participation.