Poland loosens defense procurement for dual-use firms

That gap has been a persistent drag on small and mid-sized firms that build drones, sensors, software, optical systems and other products that can serve both civilian and military buyers. The new decision, referred to as MON no. 171, allows the military to buy a limited number of commercial units for testing in training exercises, with the supplier present, before launching a full qualification process. Industry executives say the change could reduce the time needed to get field feedback and first orders, though the real test will be whether successful trials turn into budgeted contracts.

The stakes are broader than Poland. Krzysztof Michalski of the Polish Dual Use Chamber said NATO members remain committed to spending up to 5% of GDP on security by 2035, including 1.5% on resilience, infrastructure and industrial base support — the part of the budget where dual-use firms are most likely to benefit. His warning is that if domestic procurement and financing do not scale quickly, the work will flow to foreign suppliers instead of Polish ones.

The policy shift is already reshaping corporate strategy. Image Power, a gaming company, has moved into military applications, following earlier pivots by Klabater, now Defense.Hub. The appeal is clear: defense demand is no longer confined to classic arms makers. It now reaches space companies such as Creotech, Scanway and Liftero, as well as cybersecurity groups including Asseco and Comp, where secure communications, post-quantum encryption and military-grade software can be sold into both public and private markets.

For space firms, the logic is especially strong. Scanway says dual-use technologies are central to its 2026-2028 strategy, citing optical systems and fast image processing as tools for both commercial satellite services and defense intelligence. Liftero argues its propulsion systems are inherently dual-use because they support both satellite servicing and defense missions. That overlap gives companies a larger addressable market, but it also raises execution risk: they still need to clear procurement hurdles, secure financing and prove reliability under military standards.

For investors, the policy is bullish for the domestic defense ecosystem but not equally so for every listed name. Large contractors such as Polska Grupa Zbrojeniowa and WB remain the natural first beneficiaries of higher budgets, while smaller technology firms gain optionality if the new procurement channel works as intended. The bull case is that Poland creates a faster route from civilian innovation to military contracts and builds a homegrown supplier base. The bear case is that the system remains too centralized and too slow, leaving start-ups to burn cash while established incumbents capture the bulk of orders.

The key catalyst is 2027, when industry says the first meaningful evidence should emerge on whether recommendations from the new testing regime lead to serial purchases. If they do, Poland could become a more important buyer for dual-use technology and a more attractive market for investors backing defense-adjacent software, space and cybersecurity firms. If not, the policy may prove another well-intentioned reform that fails to break the procurement bottleneck.