- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Archive: https://archive.is/2025.03.19-115656/https://www.ft.com/content/eb9e0ddc-8606-46f5-8758-a1b8beae14f1
The planned fund for capitals to spend on weapons would only be open to EU defence companies and those from third countries that have signed defence agreements with the bloc, officials said on Wednesday.
It would also exclude any advanced weapons systems upon which a third country had “design authority” — restrictions on its construction or use of particular components — or control over its eventual use, the officials added.
That would exclude the US Patriot air and missile defence platform, which is manufactured by defence contractor RTX, and other US weapons systems where Washington has restrictions on where they can be used.
The policy is a victory for France and other countries that have demanded a “Buy European” approach to the continent’s defence investment push, amid fears over the long-term dependability of the US as a defence partner and supplier sparked by President Donald Trump.
At least 65 per cent of the cost of the products would need to be spent in the EU, Norway and Ukraine.
EU member states would not be able to spend the money on products “where there can be a control on the use or the destination of that weapon . . . It would be a real problem if equipment acquired by countries cannot be used because a third country would object,” one of the officials said.
You must log in or register to comment.
What about Israel?
We should definitely stop selling weapons there but do we even buy anything from there? They have their own heavy vehicles and AA but I’d be surprised to see a Merkava tank or something in a European army and Iron Dome only works on rocket equivalent of rocks thrown over a wall.
[edit] we probably get ammo
Yes we do. Finland has ordered David’s Sling for example.
PULS is bought by Germany and Spain, with the Netherlands and Denmark using it already.
Germany has also bought Arrow3 as a anti ballistic missile AA system. There is nothing like it available in the EU.
Lots of those advanced Israeli AA weapons are developed together with US defence contractors and multinationals (Arrow3 = Boeing, David’s Sling = Raytheon) so one could hope they’re off the table too.
We already know different countries buy intelligence software for law enforcement purposes. I would not be surprised if other intelligence and cyber warfare suppliers were Israeli.
I doubt tools for policing citizens are in scope of this fund.
If you abstract to intelligence tools, which is what they are, I am quite sure they will be included.
EDIT: and indeed they are
Thanks for finding this! Still holding on to the hope that there’s a difference between electronic warfare and electronic surveillance.
I learned the hard way that hope, like fear, is a bad habit.
Good stuff, reaming by buying foreign equipment is only kicking the can down the line.
Investing into defense industry that can build new weapons is far stronger then temporarily buying weapons.
Or worse, renting or “licensing” weapons.
“Unless their home countries sign defense pacts”, which I kinda expect the UK and Turkey to sign.
Dangit, if only we had some sort of defense agreements with the US… /s
Removed by mod
To the mod that removed my comment due to misinformation:.
Published Jan 29 2025 Sir Keir Starmer’s plan to agree a security pact with the EU is being blocked by French and other member states’ demands over fishing rights and a youth mobility scheme, complicating hopes of an early win in “reset” talks with Brussels.
https://www.ft.com/content/3fb38bd6-c1a3-4ba7-80d7-290d4bea06fb
Edit: edited the first sentence as I was confrontational.
I don’t know why the Brexiteers are pumping this narrative again.
No, I don’t for one minute believe that Macron would jeopardize European security just for fishing rights. There is no way that Poland, Germany and the Netherlands would accept that.
I do believe that the politicians are working on a slightly grander deal that will restore trade between the UK and EU. Such a deal could be defended on both sides against critics as “a necessary compromise to secure Europe”.
And Labour will benefit from the economic growth, which they hope will let them keep a majority next elections.
I do not think that there will be a trade pact between UK and EU if the UK will not accept the requirements of the EU. The EU is stronger and has all cards compared to the UK. The anti EU country Switzerland had to accept the EU requirements for Schengen. Switzerland did not comply to some the requirements and the EU did not back up. The result is, e.g., that you cannot buy swiss stocks in European stock exchanges.
I translated it via DeepL
The focus here is on the enforcement of EU internal market law in Switzerland. Switzerland, in turn, is blocking or delaying agreed measures because it fears distortions of competition. Negotiations between the European Union and Switzerland on a corresponding framework agreement began back in 2014. In the meantime, the EU had increased the pressure on Switzerland by wanting to devalue the Swiss stock exchange.
As Switzerland did not react, Switzerland lost its stock market equivalence in June 2019. In concrete terms, this means that Switzerland has been valued as a stock market country like Malaysia, for example, for over five years. After attempts to conclude a framework agreement between the EU and Switzerland also failed in 2021, negotiations were resumed in spring 2024 - so far without success.
I hope so. Time will tell.
UK: Damn Brexit…
Switzerland: Neutral neutrality neutral …
Ukraine: We’re still alive. At some extent…
USA: Tariffs! I’ll covfefe all those idiots!!!
Putin: ?Switzerland is targeted because of this:
states would not be able to spend the money on products “where there can be a control on the use or the destination of that weapon . . . It would be a real problem if equipment acquired by countries cannot be used because a third country would object,” one of the officials said.
Which is perfectly reasonable. Switzerland can sit on a throne of flawless ethics but it’s just pointless to source weapons from there.
Remember at the start of this war Germany could not send the artillery shells (and maybe tanks? Don’t recall exactly) it wanted to Ukraine because they were being made in Switzerland.
This is the logical consequence of the Swiss neutrality position.
Gepard ammunition
Thanks!
It’s even worse, it’s FLAK ammo, not even something potentially used as offense like artillery.
Do not underestimate the effect of 1100 rpm of 35 mm shells vs infantry and lightly armored vehicles. The gun can be lowered to -10 Degrees and AFAIK the Gepards in Ukraine have been used in a ground combat role.
If you have seen one of these Gepards in action, you know that everything on the other side of the barrels are in big trouble, except it’s heavily armored.
And I guess even if it is the occupants might be deaf by the end of the barrage.
I kinda remember memes, after a Gepard killed a rusian tank, so even that might not be a hurdle
Yep. (Of course it’s the far right in our country preaching about “neutrality” because they are in the pockets of imperialist russia).
Put in: Nazis everywhere!
Do any European defence companies have SAMs competitive with the Patriot, or are they still a generation behind?
Multiple
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_surface-to-air_missiles
German Iris-T Norways NASAM French Aster 30
You’re comparing apples and oranges.
Of those I would say that only Aster 30 + SAMP/T is a viable Patriot alternative.
And I believe IRIS-T is superior to current US alternatives.
The big advantage of Iris-T is the price of a missile. As in Iris-T is at 250k, Aster30 at 2million and Patriot at 4million. The problem with it is the much shorter range and no anti ballisitc missile capability.
There is going to be so many Boxers…
my beloved 😍
