The Sentinel Weekly: FCAS fracas
Plus proportionate drone response, conscription, deftech financing and more
The fight over Europe’s next-generation fighter jet is approaching a crunch point, with defence ministers from France and Germany – as well as the CEOs of the lead contractors – airing their differences ahead of an attempt to get the program back on track by the end of the year.
The Future Combat Air System (FCAS) is a planned sixth-generation fighter jet, implying stealth and manoeuvrability comparable or superior to fifth-generation jets such as the US F-35, plus the addition of autonomous ‘wingman’ drones. The lead contractors are France’s Dassault; Airbus – a Franco-German company but acting as the German coordinator for this project; and Spain’s Indra.
Since only the US, Russia and China build fifth-generation jets, the successful completion of FCAS would mark a leap forward for European manufacturers from the fourth-generation Eurofighter Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen.
Its failure, by contrast, would place all of Europe’s hopes for an indigenous sixth-generation jet on the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP), which is being developed by the UK’s BAE Systems, Italy’s Leonardo, and Japan’s Mitsubishi – or else keep Europe dependent on the US, namely Boeing’s planned F-47.
A serious rift appeared in the FCAS consortium over the summer, when Dassault CEO Eric Trappier demanded that his company should take a clear lead; he was swiftly backed up by the French government, which told Germany it wanted to take on 80% of the workload.
In the last two weeks disagreements have spilled into the open. Late last month, Airbus CEO Guillaume Faury said Dassault was welcome to leave the consortium if it wasn’t happy with the agreed workplan. The chairman of Airbus Defence and Space’s works council – which represents employees and has significant power under German corporate law – this week called for Airbus to break from Dassault, Euractiv reported.
French military officials have downplayed the spat and reaffirmed France’s commitment to the program. But France is in political turmoil: Defence Minister Catherine Vautrin took office just last month. Her German counterpart Boris Pistorius late last week cast doubt on whether she could bring Dassault to heel.
Echoes of the 1980s
The episode echoes the early stages of the Typhoon program, when French demands for a lead role led the consortium to splinter in 1985, with France going on to develop the Dassault Rafale independently and the other four members – Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain – pressing on.
Both the Typhoon and the Rafale were completed and entered the market with some degree of success: The Rafale is or will be operated by nine countries, and the Typhoon by ten. But they notably failed to eclipse the US F-16, which is more than a decade older and remains the workhorse of some 25 air forces, including ten in Europe.
This time around, it’s not clear the FCAS program could survive France’s departure. Neither Germany nor Spain has recent experience of building advanced airframes, while the UK and Italy (which do) are otherwise engaged on the GCAP. France can build airframes, but it’s not clear whether it has the research and industrial capacity to take on every aspect of a cutting-edge platform. Jumping from fourth to sixth generation means reinventing everything, down to the engine.
Will it fly?
At the same time, there’s a growing sense in Europe that relying on the US for fighter jets is strategically unacceptable. In 2023, the US had the contractual power to block Denmark and the Netherlands from donating some of their F-16s to Ukraine for several crucial months. When you buy a plane from the US, you don’t fully own it.
Contractual restrictions aside, the ubiquity of advanced software means that any withdrawal of technical support could quickly cripple hardware bought from outside suppliers. Iran managed to keep its F-4s flying for decades after the 1979 revolution, despite the withdrawal of US maintenance and spare parts. The F-35 – or the future F-47 – could probably be made unflyable overnight.
That concern goes all the way down to individual systems. Guntram Wolff, a senior fellow at Bruegel, told an event in Brussels this week that the presence of US-made targeting software on Germany’s brand-new F127 frigates could potentially make the whole platform dependent on continued US support.
“This dependence can very quickly mean that major equipment such as frigates may not work properly any more,” he said.
From that point of view, an up-to-date native fighter jet is a strategic necessity for Europe, not a nice-to-have. If FCAS falls apart, that will put a huge amount of hope on the GCAP – and bring great commercial opportunity to BAE, Leonardo and Mitsubishi if they deliver a good product. Alternatively, perhaps the prospect of such riches will guide Airbus and Dassault past their differences.
Point of view: Drone incursions are no cause for panic
Recent drone incursions over civil and military infrastructure in Belgium should be taken seriously but the threat should not be exaggerated, as this would help the perpetrators to show Europe as weak and unprepared, according to an essay published by the Egmont Institute this week.
Authors Michelle Haas, Pieter Balcaen and Tim Haesebrouck write that the incursions are a classic example of a ‘hybrid threat’, destabilising the target state while staying below the threshold of open hostilities, thereby making a response difficult to gauge.
Belgium and other European countries should more clearly delineate the responsibilities of police, the armed forces, air traffic controllers and others when it comes to responding to drone incursions, they write. The authorities should also beware of over-reacting, which would both divert resources away from other projects and project a sense of vulnerability.
Public communications are also key, the authors write, since conflicting messages or official silence will weaken trust in institutions and sow divisions in society – which is a central objective of hybrid operations, no less than weakening the economy or gathering intelligence.
The authors praise the Belgian authorities for seeking help from other NATO members. Far from being a sign of weakness, this demonstrated unity within the alliance; and the quick responses from Germany, France and the UK showed Belgium’s high standing as an active member, having significantly stepped up its spending in recent years.
In the news
The UK will provide “kit and capability” to help Belgium counter drone incursions, the head of the armed forces said. France and Germany have made similar commitments after drones forced the temporary closure of Brussels and Liege airports, and flew over military airbases.
Germany will call up all 18-year-old men for a medical exam and make legal provisions to enact conscription in an emergency. The Bundeswehr is about 80,000 regular soldiers short of its NATO target, and lacks more than 100,000 trained reservists.
European defence tech companies are struggling to raise money because some banks maintain an ethical ban on working with the defence sector, the FT reported.
Unidentified drones flew over a gunpowder factory in Bergerac, France, on Monday and again on Wednesday, AFP reported. The factory belongs to Eurenco and supplies charges for ammunition including 155mm artillery shells, in high demand in Ukraine.
Thank you for reading The Sentinel. To receive all of our free news and analysis, subscribe by clicking the button below.
If you’d like to submit an op-ed, or are interested in a full subscription when they become available, please email sam@the-sentinel.eu.