On the opening day of the European Robotics Forum 2026 in Stavanger, geopolitics took centre stage. A plenary panel addressed the question of how Europe can protect and strengthen its robotics industry in a world of growing uncertainty. Four speakers from the energy, defence and manufacturing sectors shared their perspectives.
Moderator Nabil Belbachir of NORCE opened the session with a video presentation that framed the core of the discussion sharply: Europe is increasingly treating robotics as a subset of artificial intelligence, and that is a mistake. AI and robotics overlap, but are fundamentally different in nature. AI runs on software and algorithms; robotics is anchored in physical engineering — actuators, sensors, mechanics. Whoever invests in AI while neglecting robotics is building a brain without a body.
The comparison with Europe’s semiconductor industry was explicit. The example of Qimonda — the German chipmaker that went bankrupt in 2009, once employing 13,000 people and controlling ten percent of the global DRAM market — illustrated what is at stake. When China faced export restrictions in 2014 and sought to develop its own memory chips, it reached back to Qimonda’s patents and former personnel. The ecosystem had been lost; the knowledge not entirely, but the leadership was gone.
Resilience from the energy sector
Michelle Williams, Head of Business Transformation at Aker BP, defined resilience from an operator’s perspective as the ability to keep critical infrastructure running under severe stress — whether that stress is geopolitical in nature, stems from cyber threats, or arises from technological dependencies. Strategic autonomy, in her view, comes down to control: over the supply chain, over data, over technology.
Williams argued for an end-to-end approach: “AI only creates value when it is connected to robust sensing, actuation and autonomous assistance.” Europe is currently scaling intelligence without securing the physical layer. Without robotics, AI remains conceptual; operations still depend on physical systems for maintenance and lifecycle support. Her recommendation: make robotics an independent strategic pillar, separate from AI, and build full-stack capabilities — from component to end product.
Kongsberg: multiple suppliers, multiple continents
Linn Winsnes Thrane, Vice President Technology at Kongsberg, described the concrete measures the company takes to absorb production disruptions. The company maintains a policy of multiple component suppliers per part to avoid dependence on a single source. Production facilities are distributed across multiple continents, mitigating the impact of trade barriers and regional disruptions. During the Covid-19 pandemic, Kongsberg built up a strategic inventory of critical components — a buffer of at least six months — which has since been maintained as standard practice.
Thrane stressed that European resilience in robotics is not purely a technological question. “We also need to ensure a skills adaptation of our workforce. Otherwise we won’t make it.” She also called for aligning robotics development with circular production models: Kongsberg customers can return products at end of life for refurbishment, component reuse or responsible disposal — reducing both costs and external dependencies.
NATO DIANA: defence as a growth opportunity
Heather Buisman of NATO’s Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic (DIANA) outlined how robotics occupies a central position in the accelerator programme. The portfolio includes autonomous systems — UAVs and UUVs —, applications in biotechnology and human enhancement, and robotics for logistics and critical infrastructure in extreme environments. Robotics also plays a key role in scaling up production across all technologies in the programme.
DIANA actively supports companies in shifting supply chains onto Alliance territory and in replacing foreign investors with NATO-aligned funding partners. Buisman cautioned that moving to a dual-use or defence-first strategy demands more than technical adjustments: pricing, go-to-market and legal structures are fundamentally different from the civilian market. “You need to ask yourself whether you’re ready as a company to manage those parallel streams.”
Leonardo: dual use as a risk spectrum
Flavio Fusco of Leonardo, responsible for civil R&D cooperative projects, stressed that dual use is set to become the default starting point in the EU’s upcoming Framework Programme. That brings new requirements that project managers need to understand well in advance.
Fusco described dual use not as a binary property but as a spectrum of risks. When a project contains defence-sensitive elements, two categories of additional requirements come into play: export control and security classification. Export control requires detailed documentation of every item in the project — physical or intangible — including its intended use and the nationality of the partners involved. Security classification can lead to requirements such as personal security clearances, restricted working areas and limitations on publication — burdens that smaller companies or universities may find difficult to carry.
A shared sense of direction
Despite the varied backgrounds of the panellists, the common thread was unambiguous: Europe cannot achieve strategic autonomy by prioritising AI while neglecting robotics. The physical industry — with its supply chains, production facilities and skilled workforce — requires targeted investment and protection. The loss of Qimonda stands as a warning; the loss of Europe’s robotics industry would be a repetition that is harder to recover from.
