3d ago

Israel received more funding from the European Innovation Fund than ⅔ of all EU countries combined

www.lira.ltd

The EIC Accelerator - Cumulative Data & Stats | Lira | Innovation Funding

We present cumulative data and statistics collected since the launch of the fully-fledged version of the EIC Accelerator in June 2021.

![](https://6424293.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hub/6424293/hubfs/Companies Funded by Country.png)

63 comments

Never fund theocracies. It doesn't matter what religion, don't fund theocracies. In any way. Ever.
- lmao you think it's because of religion.
  Yeah nothing to do with the fact some countries are making bank selling them drones and white phosphorus and shit
  
  Israel is a leading producer and exporter of drones themselves. I don’t think they import many.
- Israel is not a theocracy; it's an ethnostate.
  
  It is officially a theocracy. Citizenship is given based on religion, rather than ethnicity
  
  Most countries in Europe are ethnostates.
I won't comment on the obviously partial title (OP's title, not the linked article's) and on the fact that the article's analyzes the investments done since 2021 (ie. when Israel didn't kill people willy-nilly, not as much as it does now at least), but I would love to know why on earth the UK and (especially) Israel are included in the program.
I mean, the EIC Accelerator funds come from the EU (IIUC - does Israel actually contribute?)... even if one were to ignore the ongoing mass extermination of Gazaui, why would an EU institution invest in Israel?
- [Edit: all is clear now, see my other reply]
  Speaking from Israel, I'm just as confused as you are. My best guess: Israel's reputation (before the war) as a "Start-Up Nation" was well earned, a lot of technology and innovation was happening here. Arguably still is (hard to tell with all the war stuff). So generally it made sense to invest in Israeli startups simply to advance technology in general.
  But this is obviously an EU-centric program. All other countries listed are EU. So it's still weird.
  
  Because they invest in weaponry and surveillance tech. It's the laboratory.
- It's part of Horizon Europe, which has a whole bunch of non-EU members who also pay into it
- Okay, I found the answer:
  https://eic.ec.europa.eu/eic-funding-opportunities/eic-accelerator_en
  Who can apply?
  Applicants from EU Member States and countries associated to the Horizon Europe programme:
  ...
  For Horizon Europe, the easiest list to find is on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon_Europe
  In short, Israel is part of the program.
  
  Yeah, Israel and UK contribute to the Horizon Europe's budget, and are fully eligible to the grants under the program.
  The program is managed by the European Commission. Thus, in theory, the countries outside the EU pay but have no influence on the decision-making bodies. This can be a big disadvantage in more politically loaded processes. I suspect (from my experience with the ERC) that the selection process under Horizon Europe is build very much to focus on evaluating each project separately, not providing equity by country. Israel and the UK get a lot of funds since from there come project that, if not good, are at the very least popular. Or rather: That the decision boards, usually filled with specialists from the respective fields, find to have the highest feasibility times impact (figuratively, as, to the best of my knowledge, no such value is calculated).
  I see no conspiracy or a bypass to support Israel with extra money here. They were just good at writing grant proposal (or however you call it in the startup world), and they were allowed to be a part of EU's research program as they have always been.
  They benefit from it nevertheless. And it is high time to end the collaboration. It is already being discussed. And it is good to know it would hurt indeed - thanks for the research, OP's sources!
  https://efe.com/en/latest-news/2025-07-28/eu-suspension-israels-horizon-europe-gaza-attacks/
- AFAIK the funding ultimately comes out of the Horizon Europe pot of which Israel is a fully paid up associated member. I also wonder how they're defining which country a given grant goes to - lots of Israeli headquartered companies have extensive operations in EU countries.
Lots of Israel ball gobblers here, for some reason.
- Feddit is German
  
  And Germany is fascist
Wait, is Israel in the EU?
- No, but this is not strictly an EU program. The UK and Norway both received funding, and there are heaps of other non-EU countries like Tunisia, Egypt, and Canada in it
  
  Neither of those bombs civilians.
If you read the stats and you come up with such an (edited) title, it is clear that OP has an agenda. This is not about information or instigating a discussion because they are interesting in something, it's just to spread someone's propaganda.
- What are you talking about, an agenda? I presented the link and the graph and gave the post a title as to what stood out the most to me.
  I didn't include the UK because I thought that the UK had still been in the EU in 2021 (I misremembered that Brexit was November 2021 and not 2020) - Regardless, UK is in Europe. Israel is not, and never has been to my knowledge.
  
  Regardless, UK is in Europe. Israel is not, and never has been to my knowledge.
  So?
  The data you've shown here is about the EIC (European Innovation Council), which is funded by Horizon Europe, in which, despite its name, also non-European countries can be (associated) members of. This includes Israel, but also Turkey, Canada or Tunisia, i.a.. Those members obviously also have to pay into it.
  
  @Babalugats@feddit.uk
  An important detail that others have already said is that the EU collaborates with a lot of non-EU and also with non-European countries. Here is a list of the EU's Science and Technology Agreements with non-EU countries.
  It has also been said that these countries must contribute financially for the projects they apply, another point that is important in this context that you didn't mention.
  What 'stood out most' to you and the way you represented it is a detail out of context that ends up in an article reflecting a completely distorted reality.
- Propaganda like "we shouldn't fund genocidal technologies"?
  
  You can criticize Israel's genocide, but this article is about something else. OP picked and chose some details out of context to provide a desired narrative, a 'method' that is unfortunately widespread here.

63 comments