Europe’s Military Supply Chain Under Strain – New Study Exposes Critical Vulnerabilities and Calls for Institutional Overhaul

May 9, 2025

Highlights

  • Klymenko's research reveals the EU's dangerous overreliance on non-European actors for critical defense resources and logistics.
  • NATO's logistics remain predominantly dependent on U.S. military-industrial strength, limiting European strategic autonomy.
  • The study calls for centralized reform of EU defense governance to prevent long-term geopolitical marginalization.

A 2025 thesis by Roman Klymenko, titled Supply Chain Robustness in EU Military-Industrial Framework: Potential and Reformation, delivers a rigorous and timely assessment of systemic weaknesses in Europeโ€™s defense-related supply chainsโ€”highlighting how crises like the war in Ukraine, COVID-19, and the semiconductor shock have laid bare the European Unionโ€™s overreliance on non-European actors for critical resources, particularly rare earth elements and strategic materials.

Study Methodology

Klymenko applies the Supply Chain Operations Reference (SCOR) model to evaluate institutional performance across European defense structures, with focused case studies on the European Defence Agency (EDA) and European Defence Fund (EDF). The thesis critically examines logistics coordination inside NATO, with particular attention to U.S. dominance, and evaluates institutional overlaps, communication bottlenecks, and infrastructure interdependence in the context of crisis preparedness.

Key Findings

1. Strategic Dependency on Non-EU Actors

The EU remains dangerously reliant on the United States for NATO logistics leadership and on China for critical mineral inputs vital to defense technology. This dependence undermines any claim to European strategic autonomy and risks operational paralysis during geopolitical shocks.

2. Institutional Inefficiency

Case studies of EDA and EDF operations using the SCOR framework reveal fragmented governance, poor logistical synchronization, and a lack of real-time coordination mechanisms. These failures have repeatedly delayed equipment procurement and deployment in active security scenarios.

3. NATOโ€™s Logistics Bottleneck

The research highlights how NATOโ€™s logistical backbone still hinges on U.S. military-industrial strength, limiting Europeโ€™s capacity to operate independently. Redundant command structures and inconsistent national contributions hamper efforts to increase EU-level logistics readiness.

4. Critical Infrastructure Intertwinement

The thesis underscores that the EU's defense supply chains are intricately linked to civilian infrastructure, creating points of systemic failure. For example, semiconductor shortages impacted both defense and healthcare systems during COVID-19, illustrating how cross-sector vulnerabilities propagate rapidly.

5. Urgent Need for Institutional Reform

Klymenko concludes that centralized reform of EU defense governance bodies is essential to strengthening resilience. Without a clear realignment and streamlining of defense supply chain management under EU command, Brussels risks long-term geopolitical marginalization.

Implications for Western and European Stakeholders

From an industrial and policy standpoint, this study makes clear that Europeโ€™s military-industrial autonomy is aspirational at best without aggressive restructuring. For investors, the message is equally stark: EU defense markets may remain inefficient and reactive unless member states prioritize critical infrastructure sovereignty, especially in rare earth processing, advanced manufacturing, and semiconductor independence.

The findings present a paradox for the United States and its Five Eyes allies: European weakness sustains NATO cohesion but undermines shared long-term security goals. Unless the EU builds a robust internal supply chain, Western preparedness will remain asymmetrically distributed, with disproportionate responsibility falling on Washington.

Conclusion

Klymenkoโ€™s thesis is a wake-up call for defense officials, institutional reformers, and industrial policymakers. The call to action is clear: reform or remain exposed. As rare earth independence and defense supply chain robustness rise on Brussels' strategic agenda, this research offers a blueprintโ€”but only if political will follows.

Access the study: https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:amk-202505028765 (opens in a new tab)

Search
Recent Reex News

Who Owns Malawi's Rare Earths? An Offshore Shuffle Raises Hard Questions for Investors

The Paradox of Visibility: Why Capital Chases AI-and Undervalues the Minerals That Power It

Japan Digs Six Kilometers Deep for Rare Earths-A Strategic Signal, Not a Supply Solution

Two Green Mining Breakthroughs Highlight Advances in Smart Processing and Tailings Management

From Ore to Rulebook: Ganzhou Moves Up the Rare Earth Power Stack

By Daniel

Inspired to launch Rare Earth Exchanges in part due to his lifelong passion for geology and mineralogy, and patriotism, to ensure America and free market economies develop their own rare earth and critical mineral supply chains.

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Straight Into Your Inbox

Straight Into Your Inbox

Receive a Daily News Update Intended to Help You Keep Pace With the Rapidly Evolving REE Market.

Fantastic! Thanks for subscribing, you won't regret it.

Straight Into Your Inbox

Straight Into Your Inbox

Receive a Daily News Update Intended to Help You Keep Pace With the Rapidly Evolving REE Market.

Fantastic! Thanks for subscribing, you won't regret it.