5 ms·
It seems in Europe there is the general idea that with the USA waning as the sole superpower, and further with the USA more and more focused on great power comp
by jabl 5y ago
It seems in Europe there is the general idea that with the USA waning as the sole superpower, and further with the USA more and more focused on great power competition with China [1] rather than partnering with Europe against the Soviet Union, Europe must take on more responsibility for its own defense. Including the capability to build top of the line high tech military gear like fighter jets.
Of course, the problem is how to convince European tax payers to part with the money necessary for this. Particularly as we already have two separate European projects to design next gen fighters, the UK-Italian-Swedish Tempest as well as the French-German-Spanish FCAS. Like herding cats.
I wonder what could be done to reduce the cost of developing a new top of the line fighter? More COTS components? A modular approach, which is certainly much more limited in scope in high-performance aircraft than e.g. in cars?
[1] As for China and Russia, interestingly it seems that China is poised to overtake Russia in combat aircraft development: https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/whitehall-reports/russian-and-chinese-combat-air-trends-current-capabilities-and-future-threat-outlook https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/whitehall...
- ganzuul 5y agoDon't be so eager to throw our tax money into this pit.
- jabl 5y agoAs an European taxpayer, I'm certainly concerned that resources are wasted. OTOH, Putin has time and again proved that he's a belligerent crook entirely willing to expand his territory any time his neighbors show weakness. Much as I wish it were different, Europe must be able to mount a credible defense, with or without the USA.
- toxik 5y agoYou are surely aware that France and the UK have nukes. That seems like a pretty strong deterrent.
- ClumsyPilot 5y agoSalami tactics - https://youtu.be/o861Ka9TtT4 https://youtu.be/o861Ka9TtT4
- tblt 5y agoIs it a given that France or the UK would deploy their nukes in response to, for example, Russian aggression on Europe’s eastern flank, say Estonia? If not, their use as a deterrence there is limited.
- hef19898 5y agoThe risk I see is, that the EU and NATO isn't showing a hard line (might alternative be too late, so) to Putin. Then all it takes for him to try annexing the Baltic is the reasonable impression NATO isn't willing to go to full over that. In which case we would be screwed. The abandonment of Afghanistan certainly didn't help in projecting that kind of strength.
- baybal2 5y ago> You are surely aware that France and the UK have nukes. Only few hundreds, of which much less are deployed, given Vanguard, and Triomphant frequent port calls.
- DocTomoe 5y agoAs another European, I am in favor of aligning ourselves in a mutually beneficial economic exchange with Russia and China, which causes interdependence and a diminishing risk of military conflict. Putin, repeatedly, has been shown to be a reliable, and predictable partner - something we cannot really claim about the US, and increasingly less so in recent years.
- Bronze_Colossus 5y agoPutin has not shown to be an reliable ally. The annexation of Crimea and the ongoing hybrid war in east Ukraine is one such example. Putin does not want a strong independent ally next to Russia. He either wants puppet states such as Belarus as allies or a weak and fractured European union. For all the faults the US have they are still better allies than Russia by several lightyears.
- publicola1990 5y agoMay be if granted a buffer zone of influence, Russia will be a reliable partner to Europe. To me it is Europe (and the US) that is picking ideological battlegrounds, and showing eagerness to start a new cold war.
- light_hue_1 5y agoGranted a buffer zone of influence? Let me rephrase that for you from the perspective of someone who lived on Russia's doorstep for many years. You mean to say "Maybe if we let Russia subjugate a lot more people and confine them into an evil exploitative system against their will". That's the big difference between Europe's zone of influence and Russia's zone of influence. People want to be part of the EU (the greatest thing that ever happened to the country I was born in). People want to give their lives to not be part of Russia.
- sgt101 5y agoI think everyone in Europe is keen on "mutually beneficial economic exchange with Russia and China" but I think that recent history demonstrates that Russia and China have different views from us about what mutually beneficial means. >Putin, repeatedly, has been shown to be a reliable, and predictable partner Oh come on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Sergei_and_Yulia_Skripal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Sergei_and_Yulia_... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Vrb%C4%9Btice_ammunition_warehouses_explosions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Vrb%C4%9Btice_ammunition_... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_bounty_program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_bounty_program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Montenegrin_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat_plot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Montenegrin_coup_d%27%C3%... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_independence_movement#Second_Statute_of_Autonomy_and_after https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_independence_movement#... and many other gigs!
- benhurmarcel 5y agoReducing military development costs has some solutions, but it’s difficult to apply in practice. The most effective things you can do is to not force spreading the work across specific companies and countries, and not change the specs as the program goes.