(a)

have continued increasing their defence expenditure and indicated plans for further increases in 2022 and in the 2023-25 period, also in reaction to the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine. This positive trend in defence expenditure and defence investment should be maintained in the long term, while a majority of pMS should also substantially increase defence research and technology expenditure to reach the agreed 2 % of total defence spending (collective benchmark). In this regard, available EU tools and structures, including the newly established Hub for European Defence Innovation within the European Defence Agency (EDA) and the EU Defence Innovation Scheme within the Commission should be fully considered, harnessing their potential;

(b)

have demonstrated little progress regarding the commitment to increase the number of collaborative defence capability projects and related investment in defence equipment procurement and defence research and technology. To address the EU Capability Development Priorities and to achieve the agreed collective benchmarks (20 % of total collaborative defence research and technology expenditure, 35 % of total collaborative defence equipment procurement expenditure) the pMS should make the best possible use of existing EU defence initiatives and tools, and should further increase and leverage collaborative defence investment at the EU level (6). In this respect, they are encouraged to make full use of the Coordinated Annual Review on Defence (CARD) findings and its recommendations, notably the collaborative opportunities and Focus Areas. Taking the Strategic Compass into account, they are also invited to take new opportunities forward in the PESCO framework, such as fostering joint procurement, including in the follow-up to the Joint Communication on DIGA;

(c)

have overall maintained or slightly increased their contribution to military Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions and operations, but gaps still persist and should be filled urgently. PMS should significantly enhance their efforts to fulfil the operational commitments, taking into account the single set of forces principle, as contributions to missions and operations are still of concern. PMS should step up their contributions to the EU Battlegroups roster and to the Rapid Response Database. Moreover, they should address more specifically strategic capability shortfalls, namely the High Impact Capability Goals. In addition, pMS should provide concrete proposals to improve common funding of CSDP missions and operations, also in the context of the EU Rapid Deployment Capacity (RDC), including through a re-assessment of the scope and definition of common costs to enhance solidarity and stimulate participation in military missions and operations as well as in exercise-related costs. The work on the definition of the parameters of a fair share of contributions to military missions and operations, as requested in the Council Recommendation of 16 November 2021 concerning the sequencing of the fulfilment of the more binding commitments, should be finalised as soon as possible. This is important to encourage and support pMS to increase their contributions, within their means and capabilities, to CSDP missions and operations, ensuring transparency among them on the fulfilment of their respective commitments;

(d)

have made modest progress in their uptake of the Union’s capability planning and development tools and processes as an orientation for national planning and decision-making. PMS are encouraged to step up their efforts towards a more systematic and active use of these instruments, including the CARD recommendations, to unfold their full potential and overcome capability shortcomings in a collaborative manner;

(e)

are not sufficiently addressing the commitment to work together to overcome capability shortcomings. The use of a European collaborative approach is still very limited and should be increased substantially. In their NIPs, pMS express interest in exploiting the CARD recommendations on defence cooperation, notably the identified collaborative opportunities. To this end, they should include these opportunities in a systematic manner in their national planning and report on them in their NIPs. PMS should also further work together to deliver capabilities in order to strengthen the EU’s command and control structures, in particular the Military Planning and Conduct Capability (MPCC) as the preferred command and control structure, as well as in order to operationalise the EU RDC, in line with the Strategic Compass. The Council recalled that coherence of output between the CDP and the CARD, on the one hand, and respective NATO processes such as the NATO Defence Planning Process, on the other hand, has been and will continue to be ensured where requirements overlap, while recognising the different nature of the two organisations and their respective responsibilities and memberships;

(f)

have demonstrated that the EDA is largely used as the European forum for capability development. However, the level of investment in projects developed in the EDA framework remains low and should be stepped up, also with the aim of further strengthening the EDA’s role as a forum for capability development;

(g)

have provided clearer indications that they participate in collaborative projects, strengthening the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB) throughout the Union, also by taking advantage of initiatives to jointly procure defence capabilities. However, pMS should further reflect these principles in their respective industrial policies and acquisition strategies.