The Minister of National Defence Nikos Dendias briefed today, Thursday 10 April 2025, the Special Standing Committee for Armament Programmes and Contracts of the Hellenic Parliament, with regards to the Long-term Planning of Defence Armaments of the Armed Forces 2025 – 2036.
Upon the commencement of the meeting, responding to a request by the representatives of the Opposition parties for a postponement of the discussion in the Committee, Mr Dendias stated:
“Ladies and gentlemen, I think that a misunderstanding has occurred and some clarifications are in order.
It is the first time in the country’s history that this Committee is going to be briefed on a long-term programme, 12-year for the time being – and not just that but also with provisions for 8 more years – for the long-term planning of the country’s defence armaments. Although a legal stipulation was already in place, far back, no Government ever submitted or went through the ordeal of the current procedure by the Committee of the Hellenic Parliament.
This procedure which seems to include a huge amount, various numbers were reported, “half, 1/10 of the Gross National Product”, I say once more that it pertains to the planning of the next 12 years, initially, and of the next 8 years after that.
I want to clarify something that was reported in the Plenary session. There is no increase in defence expenditure, with one exception, the one observed by Ms Anagnostopoulou earlier, the difference between the number that the Prime Minister mentioned and the one that I mentioned.
The explanation is really simple. I mentioned the further fiscal leeway, which will be provided thanks to the new European rules, if this interpretation is actually realised.
That is why you will see, in the presentation later, that the tables have two colours. The colour pertaining to the existing expenditure and another colour which pertains to the expenditure planned ahead, if the country is provided with extra fiscal leeway.
I have to say dear colleagues that I consider claims regarding “a non-detailed a priori briefing” as part of a procedural tactic of the Opposition. It is always very simple to raise procedural issues, we always do it in the Parliament’s Plenary, where we usually raise issues of unconstitutional status. It is understandable as a tactic of the Opposition, I empathise completely, I understand it. However, it cannot withstand any kind of critique.
As you can surmise, these types of briefings cannot be distributed in any way beforehand. The country’s whole military leadership is standing right here not to brief you on expenditure. Let us be clear, no one is asking you to approve any type of expenditure. What we ask is that you approve of a planning, a concept. On this concept we can integrate any discussion about armaments, which constitute individual programmes, examined each time separately, as stipulated in article 31Β of the Parliament’s regulation.
We did not come before the national assembly to ask you to approve of expenditure amounting to 50 or 25 billions! Reports are circulating concerning billions, while nobody asked such a thing of you. The thing that happened for the first time is that a Government came to explain its rationale regarding the country’s defence. Most of the representatives of the parties, who scathingly made mention of the current Government, have forgotten that when you were in charge you did not act accordingly, although the law stipulated so. Now you are shaking your finger at us claiming that we should not be briefing you!
We are not asking for money here. I say that once more. Furthermore, I stated in the Plenary session that the obligation exists for the Parliament’s briefing every time a programme is examined for over 30 million euros. There is a pertinent legislative provision, I will show it to you, which will lower this limit to 10 million euros.
I also stated that for any programme you wish you may have a detailed briefing, regardless of the required amount. So, we are currently discussing the country’s planning. I do not understand the questions you raise. Who is going to conduct the country’s planning? Will the Hellenic Parliament in corpore decide which weapon systems will affect the country after 10-15 years? Through experts who, apart from the stipulations of the regulation, will be present here and advise every PM?
Who in the past utilised these practices, that you mention here today, and which now you are asking the current Government to implement? Who demanded them any time in the past? Do we have to apologise for doing what you failed to do Mr Katrinis? However, you did not execute your own obligation. Please do not interrupt me. I mentioned you because you were the first to raise the issue. Does it offend you that I am repeating your words? So, why didn’t you do what had to be done? The law of 2010 is a law by Mr Venizelos. Have you ever briefed the Committee?
I am reaching a conclusion because I do not want to make this about certain individuals. Mr Katrinis, there is no issue. This procedure pertains to an overall briefing of the Parliament on the way which the Government believes that the Defence has to be planned for the following 20 years. That is the truth of the matter. It includes some initial admissions on defence systems which the country must utilise and this happens for the first time. Of course, we are asking for the view and cooperation of the national assembly.
I say yet again, we are not asking approval for any expenditure. In addition, we are not here to legislate.
Allow me to read it clearly to you, you have checked it so it is certain, the Regulation states that the duty of the Committee is examination and monitoring. What we are currently doing is a step further. We are asking for it, exactly because the law of 2010 stipulates it.
Therefore, to conclude, here we have a procedure, Mr Katrinis, Mr Kedikoglou, Ms Anagnostopoulou, Professor, where we explain the working hypotheses which we will use as the basis in order to proceed to individual armament programmes which will be individually presented. They are not presented here today.
Therefore, I do not comprehend this type of today’s reaction. I do not. If the procedure is concluded and you deem that the provided data for these hypotheses are not sufficient, we can conduct as many sessions as you like. We can discuss this issue as much as you like. There is no objection. Nevertheless, I have to say, this a priori postponement almost surprises me.
Yet again, my view is this: The Government will proceed with the briefing. It will move forward with the discussion. It will listen to the National Assembly, we will convene as many times as you like and for as long as you like. We will submit any expert opinion you like. The military leadership is here to express it. I am not the general who will tell you what the country’s defence should be. From then on, you will express the view that you deem appropriate.
However, I say yet again and I conclude: Here we do not approve of an armament programme. Please take note of that. It is about planning, not about the authorisation for the acquisition of weapon systems“.
Finally, the Minister of National Defence, before the commencement of the closed-door session, in order to safeguard the secret character of the briefing, stated:
“Is it possible to give accurate amounts for a 12-year planning when we have not even started negotiations? However, you must have a sense of what we are talking about. On one hand we are accused of lack of information, on the other hand we are accused of too much information because we include amounts. I am not asking for the national assembly’s commitment, nor can I ask it of you, because there is no negotiation, no discussion and no selection of a particular system.
Each general category does not mean a selection of the particular system for most of the times. Where a particular selection applies, it can be very well explained why that particular selection was made. However, there has to be an understanding between us. We could not provide more information in the initial phase. We could not and we should not.
Mr President, if you wish, we can now turn off the microphones and approach the subject more expertly”.
A detailed briefing followed by Mr Dendias, the Chief of HNDGS General Dimitrios Choupis and the competent senior officers of the Armed Forces regarding the Long-term Defence Armaments Planning of the Armed Forces 2025-36.