REMIT partners Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR) and Maastricht University (UM) have published an open-access article on EU member states’ approaches to military AI governance in European Security, the highest-ranked academic journal in area studies. Authored by Professor Michal Onderco (EUR), Professor Sophie Vanhoonacker (MU), and Mahmoud Javadi, a former REMIT researcher, the paper explores how national priorities and strategic cultures shape EU member states’ choices of venues and approaches to the governance of military AI.
Commenting on the publication, the authors said: “This paper is part of our ongoing work within the REMIT project examining how European actors engage with the governance of emerging defence technologies. Our study investigates why EU member states often turn to external, ad hoc forums rather than the EU itself to shape the governance of military AI. Drawing on extensive document analysis and more than a dozen elite interviews with diplomats, policymakers, and experts, we introduce a new analytical framework linking national strategic cultures to institutional choices. We hope this research helps clarify Europe’s diverse positions and contributes to the international discussions on military AI governance, including those recently taking place at the United Nations General Assembly.”
Abstract
This paper investigates why EU member states have largely opted for external forums, rather than the EU itself, to shape the emerging governance of military AI. While the EU’s limited competence in security and defence is often cited as the primary constraint, its robust support for Ukraine following Russia’s 2022 invasion or past involvement in other arms control forums challenge the idea that institutional limitations are insurmountable.
Drawing on the concept of forum shopping, we introduce a two-dimensional analytical framework focused on institutional bindingness (ranging from soft principles to binding rules) and stakeholder engagement (from state-centric to transnational formats). We apply this framework to four key EU member states (Austria, France, Germany and the Netherlands) and assess their preferences across four institutional venues: the EU, the United Nations, the Political Declaration, and REAIM, covering the period 2019–2024.
Our analysis reveals that, despite divergent policy preferences, these states converge around flexible, plurilateral forums that better match their strategic and procedural goals, leaving the EU marginalised not by default, but by design.
Full Citation
Javadi, M., Onderco, M. and Vanhoonacker, S. (2025) ‘The European Union’s missing voice: member states’ forum shopping in military AI governance’, European Security, pp. 1- 22. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2025.2570806.