Defence expert warns rapid procurement reflects ‘panic situation’ in Denmark’s armed forces

The Defence’s acute need for additional building capacity, which last Friday led to a tender for temporary facilities worth billions, is attracting attention.

The massive framework agreement, estimated at DKK 8 billion but potentially rising to as much as DKK 12 billion, has prompted a number of manufacturers and suppliers of modular and pavilion buildings to anticipate significant business opportunities.

However, Danish defence expert Peter Viggo Jakobsen, associate professor at the Royal Danish Defence College, has also taken note of the tender, which is intended to rapidly provide the Defence with temporary facilities for offices, storage, classrooms, infirmaries, canteens, accommodation for additional conscripts, and more.

In contrast to the construction industry, his reaction to the tender is not one of enthusiasm. 

He sees it as evidence that the Defence is under pressure and has entered a "panic situation" triggered by political decisions and the sharply deteriorating geopolitical environment following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Peter Viggo Jakobsen asks rhetorically:

- But what else was the Defence supposed to do?

He points out that Denmark has quickly moved from a situation in which politicians were reluctant to spend money on defence to one in which spending appears almost unlimited.

- You simply cannot build the required infrastructure quickly enough, says Peter Viggo Jakobsen, associate professor at the Royal Danish Defence College.

- The fact that you have a prime minister suddenly saying ‘buy, buy, buy, spend DKK 100 billion in a year or face criticism’ puts the organisation under pressure. At the same time, conscription has been accelerated, so it now has to proceed faster than originally planned.

- And construction cannot keep pace. It is simply not possible to deliver the necessary building capacity quickly enough, because the labour market is fully employed and skilled workers are in short supply. That is why we end up in this situation, Jakobsen explains, noting that interested bidders have been given only one month to respond to the tender.

Ad hoc solutions

Jakobsen notes that with a longer lead time, the Defence could have assessed its future requirements more thoroughly.

- In that case, it might have been possible to avoid this temporary solution and instead build what is needed at a normal pace, using permanent rather than temporary structures.

- But there is simply no time for that now, which is why we have ended up here, he says, referring in part to the imminent need to house more conscripts as 11 months of conscription is introduced at a larger scale than before.

Asked whether the pace raises concerns about improvised solutions, he replies:

- Of course, that is what we will see in some cases. That was also stated by the government at the press conference where ‘buy, buy, buy’ was announced. The defence minister said there would be many mistakes: ‘I have now given the Chief of Defence responsibility for everything, so you can take it up with him.’ So politicians are proceeding with their eyes open and have relinquished responsibility, the defence expert says.

Large-scale tender to fill gap

In his view, the tender is "an attempt to fill a gap until permanent solutions are ready."

- This is an attempt to respond to demands for immediate action. You have to do what you can to meet very tight deadlines.

- Further down the line, one hopes to replace these temporary solutions with something more permanent; otherwise, we will end up spending considerable sums on stopgap measures, Jakobsen says.

- All the ideas politicians had about muddling through without spending money have collapsed because the war in Ukraine continues and the Americans have stepped back. That is what has created this acute panic situation.

- Politicians gambled heavily on avoiding these costs. They have now realised that this is not possible, and everything must move quickly. That is why they are forced to tender the task in this way. I genuinely cannot see what else the Defence could have done, Peter Viggo Jakobsen concludes.