Supporters of NATO's plan to accelerate weapons technology development argue that the alliance has no choice but to adapt. Ukraine's battlefield experience has demonstrated that speed and adaptability are decisive in modern warfare. Russian forces, while heavily resourced, have struggled to counter Ukrainian drones and electronic warfare systems that were developed or modified in weeks.
Proponents point out that NATO's current procurement process, often taking a decade from concept to fielding, is ill-suited to an era where threats evolve rapidly. By adopting Ukraine's model of testing and iterating in real combat conditions, NATO can field capabilities that deter aggression before it starts. The alliance's own innovation bodies, such as DIANA and the NATO Innovation Fund, are already funding dual-use technologies like autonomous drones and secure communications.
Moreover, this initiative signals to adversaries that NATO is serious about technological superiority. A faster development cycle means allies can respond to new Russian weapons systems more quickly, closing windows of vulnerability. For member states like Germany, which has been criticized for slow defense spending, participation offers a way to contribute effectively without massive increases in conventional forces.
Against the backdrop of the war in Ukraine, the argument for urgency is compelling. Delays in fielding counter-drone systems or electronic warfare capabilities could cost lives. Proponents acknowledge the need for safety but insist that reasonable risk is better than the certainty of being outpaced.