I suspect that if the results of this effort were released with an appropriate hybrid Open-Source license, as well as providing both the Open-Source contributors & corporate funders /contributors with some sort of tax break, that more European people and firms would see more benefits, than if the results were locked up in some sort of Airbus-esque version of Intel. Comparing the business strategy that Intel pursued with Itanium to ARM's, I become more certain in this line of thinking.
Or to put it another way, an entity which was more like ARM than Intel or AMD but which did not have a foundational priority to maximize shareholder returns (i.e. not a Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung (GmbH)) but instead with the priority to remain non-profit by folding all profits back into development efforts. And which produced and sold IP in similar ways as ARM but with hybrid licensing schemes, Open Source & non commercial projects could have access to certain parts of the IP, while commercial & proprietary projects would be required to buy a license or somehow contribute in kind. If the tax breaks for contributions were designed skilfully enough, then corporations inside the EU and paying taxes to the EU could, in a sense, spend less on R&D than it would cost to develop a new chip, by working on this EU wide collaboration and receive a commercial licence of similar value in return. The EU could protect cases of a 3rd party mass producing these chips as a commercial enterprise without a commercial license, with existing IP, contractual, and tax laws. So all corporations with EU subsidiaries would be obliged to follow these licenses, if they wished to use the chips and all chips or devices with chips would require the correct licensing to be sold in the EU.
In this way, any company could produce, or have a 3rd party produce, chips based on this IP and include them in their commercial offerings all over the world. However, EU companies who vigorously participated in the development could have advantages when it comes to providing chips to the EU market, while at the time encouraging lower costs for EU consumers by allowing for non-commercial licenses.
Naturally, this leaves open the possibility of a foreign group making unlicensed chips & devices for markets outside the EU. Essentially, this is a similar problem which ARM faces, but I am not familiar with any large examples of this kind of abuse... but I live in the EU, so it's possible that in various places around the world there are such things... but I guess, if they do exist, they've never become a big enough problem to make the news. Presumably this is due to the limitations that ARM places on their licensing in regards to 3rd party Fabs.