Brussels says Greece’s €2.9 billion SAFE proposal far exceeds its €787 million ceiling and fails to meet EU cooperation rules, forcing Athens to revise its plan amid regional disappointment.
New details reported by The Power Game reveal that Greece submitted a defence investment plan worth €2.8–2.9 billion under the EU’s SAFE programme, despite having a maximum credit ceiling of just €787 million. According to the outlet, the European Commission assessed that the proposal exceeded Athens’ allocation by a wide margin and did not sufficiently adhere to SAFE’s core principles of joint procurement, multinational cooperation and strengthening the European defence industrial base.
The Commission’s official letter of 5 December 2025, marked SENSITIVE, instructs Athens to rewrite its plan so that it aligns with the €787,669,283 allocation and fully complies with Article 4(3) of the SAFE Regulation — the provision that requires genuine multinational participation and excludes unilateral, nationally focused acquisitions. Brussels emphasised that much of the initial Greek list consisted of single-country, single-user procurements that did not serve SAFE’s EU-wide cooperation objectives. Several listed items did not involve any European partners, and some projects were reportedly reshuffled in priority multiple times, giving the overall submission the appearance of a last-minute compilation.
Greek opposition parties described the development as a “de facto rejection”, accusing the government of a lack of seriousness and strategic coherence. The Ministry of Defence argued that the extensive list was intentionally broad to remain prepared in the event of increased EU funding or reallocation of unused resources from other member states. Following the Commission’s intervention, Athens is preparing to revise its requested loan amount from €1.24 billion to the allocated €787 million.
The Commission’s demand means that Greece must restructure and resubmit its entire SAFE plan — a move interpreted in Athens as another political setback. Greece had attempted to leverage its SAFE position to block Türkiye’s access to potential SAFE-eligible sales and to use the process as a bargaining tool tied to Aegean disputes. The results have produced two distinct results because Athens received no new financial support while SAFE dedicated its resources to protect frontline nations including Poland which stands as the primary target of Russian aggression.
The episode demonstrates how Greek political leaders became more dissatisfied with the situation while the Commission maintained its requirement for SAFE criteria and complete transparency and international collaboration. The revision process for Greece indicates that the country should lower its expectations because SAFE operates based on European defence needs rather than regional competition.