US President Donald Trump’s administration has warned the European Union against favoring European arms manufacturers in a planned overhaul of EU defense procurement rules, saying any such changes could trigger retaliation from Washington.
In remarks submitted to a European Commission consultation earlier this month, the US Department of Defense objected to any changes that would restrict American companies’ access to the European market.
The comments, first reported by Politico on Thursday, Feb. 19, were part of feedback requested by the Commission as it prepares an update to the EU’s 2009 defense procurement directive.
Pentagon pushback
“The United States strongly opposes any changes to the Directive that would limit US industry’s ability to support or otherwise participate in EU member state national defense procurements,” the administration wrote.
It warned that “protectionist and exclusionary policies that strong-arm American companies out of the market” would be the “wrong course of action,” particularly as major European defense firms continue to benefit from access to the US market.
As per Politico, the US State Department co-signed the submission. The outlet previously reported that Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau had criticized European NATO allies behind closed doors for prioritizing domestic defense industries over American suppliers.
‘Buy European’ debate
The dispute comes as the European Commission seeks to increase the share of European-made weapons in the bloc’s arsenals amid Russia’s war against Ukraine and growing uncertainty over long-term US commitments.
For decades, European militaries have relied heavily on US equipment, including F-35 fighter jets, HIMARS artillery systems and Patriot air defense batteries. Nearly two-thirds of the EU’s imported weapons originate from the United States.
The Commission is expected to present an updated procurement directive in the third quarter of this year as part of a broader effort to strengthen the EU’s defense industrial base.
Under existing initiatives, Brussels has already introduced local-content requirements. The €150 billion ($176 billion) SAFE loans-for-weapons program and a recently agreed €90 billion ($105 billion) loan package for Ukraine include provisions requiring that at least 65 percent of purchased military equipment be sourced in Europe.
It remains unclear whether the upcoming directive will introduce binding “Buy European” rules at the national level.
Threat of retaliation
The Pentagon warned that if member states introduce strong European-preference clauses in national procurement laws, Washington would likely review blanket waivers and exceptions under existing Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreements.
19 of the EU’s 27 member states have signed such agreements with the United States, allowing European firms to compete for certain Pentagon contracts.
“If European preference measures were implemented,” the Defense Department wrote, “the United States would likely review all existing blanket waivers and exceptions” under Buy American legislation.
Any future exemptions, it added, would be considered on a case-by-case basis and only when necessary to support NATO interoperability and standardization.
European companies such as Italy’s Leonardo and Sweden’s Saab currently supply equipment to the US military, though the Pentagon relies primarily on domestic manufacturers.
Transatlantic tensions
Washington argues that binding European-preference rules would limit member states’ procurement flexibility, weaken NATO cohesion and undermine capability targets agreed by allies last year.
The Trump administration also contends that such measures could conflict with commitments made under a US-EU trade agreement signed last summer, under which Brussels pledged to purchase more American defense equipment.
The exchange underscores a broader tension in US-EU relations: while Washington has urged Europe to shoulder more responsibility for its own defense, it has signaled that this should not come at the expense of American defense firms.
The US Chamber of Commerce also submitted comments opposing a strong “Buy European” clause – though in more measured language, according to Politico.