The war in Ukraine has produced a hard, practical record of how defense innovation actually happens. Urgency, short feedback loops, and direct contact with end users shape the entire stack. A recent discussion at the Resilience Conference 2025 with builders and funders working in Ukraine makes the case plain. The lesson is not a single product but it is a process that joins procurement, testing, software, and people into one cycle.
This panel, featured:
Oleksii Dorohan, CEO, Better Regulation Delivery Office (BRDO)
Alex Kinash, European Partnerships Director, Vermeer
Serhii Kupriienko, Founder & CEO, SWARMER
Tim Mak, Founder, Counteroffensive Pro
Moderator: Dr Tobias Stone, Co-founder, Resilience Media
The panelists knew exactly how defence in Ukraine worked. For example, they noted that brigades in Ukraine can spend their own funds on experimental drones, jammers, and related gear. That freedom matters. Units try tools on real missions, compare outcomes, and double down on what works. Startups, in turn, can get real revenue, real service calls, and real deadlines. If a system fails, the team fixes it in days, not quarters. This model forces accountability and speeds the loop between field feedback and a new build.
Here are some key takeaways from this wide-ranging conversation:
Combat exposes the gap between lab claims and field truth. The only answer is constant iteration with the end user. Companies building in Ukraine deploy with units, collect data, and push fixes on a weekly rhythm. Budgets must reflect that reality. Buy the core system, then reserve funds to update hardware, firmware, and tactics as threats change.
Culture is a force multiplier. On the Ukrainian front, the best ideas rise without regard to rank. Many builders were not in defense four years ago. They now mix software skills, fabrication, and operations inside regiments and brigades. This lowers the cost of trying new concepts and removes the fear of speaking up. Western militaries should protect rank for command, while opening space for engineers, operators, and analysts to test and argue on the merits.
Governance is lean and horizontal. Units talk directly to developers. Testing sites are booked through simple digital flows. Clearances and results move through the same channels. Paper is rare. The rule is speed with accountability, not permission for its own sake. That is how small firms get from concept to certified test, then to field use, without losing a year in forms.
Ukraine’s civilian digital stack is part of the story. Identity, payments, and service portals built for daily life now support mobilization, logistics, and marketplaces. Soldiers select proven kit online. The state verifies users and pays vendors. Points earned by effective units can be spent on more gear, which creates a clear link between results and resources. Civil systems and defense systems meet at well defined touchpoints. The effect is a faster kill chain and a lighter burden on staff.
The close is simple: Europe will not win on price. It can win on skill, scale, and speed. It needs to more engineers and technicians, automate production, and produce key parts at home. It must budget for continuous updates, build test beds that are easy to use, and tie procurement to results seen in the field. And, most of all, it has to keep innovating to win.
