By Roksana Izzatova, Dilorom Gulomjonova, Mushtariybonu Nazarova, UWED undergraduates, interns at IAIS
The Future Combat Air System (FCAS), conceived in 2017 by Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel as Europe’s flagship defence programme, is now on the verge of collapse. The growing tension between Germany and France over the development of next-generation fighter jets showcases more than an industrial disagreement, it exposes the fragility of Europe’s ambition to become strategically autonomous in security matters. The viability of the FCAS program and Europe’s broader defense integration are threatened by escalating political, industrial and strategic risks.
The conflict in Ukraine and the changing transatlantic landscape have fueled demands for Europe to take more ownership of its security affairs. For several decades, European security has been heavily dependent on NATO and, by extension, the United States. However, France revived their concept of “strategic autonomy”, due to strategic uncertainty and also concerns about long-term U.S. commitment. Germany, with its long-standing Atlanticist approach, has increasingly come to accept this narrative, especially since the Zeitenwende in 2022. But while there is a broad consensus on the need for strategic autonomy, there is no smooth sailing in collaborative efforts.
The FCAS project was meant to be the backbone of Europe’s future airpower capabilities, which would have combined advanced fighter aircraft, drones and digital combat systems. At the heart of the impasse lies a fundamental mismatch in military requirements. France, on the one hand, wants to safeguard its strategic autonomy in the defense industry and export flexibility. Germany, on the other hand, emphasizes shared governance and parliamentary control. France needs a jet capable of carrying nuclear weapons and launching from aircraft carriers, while Germany does not. These diverging operational needs were, remarkably, never reconciled at the programme’s outset. As one former senior French official told The Guardian, the project appeared to have been conceived “at a very high political level”, without adequate discussion about whether the two countries actually needed the same aircraft.
The industrial dimension has compounded the problem. Dassault sees no obligation to surrender its intellectual property to Airbus, while Berlin increasingly views French behaviour as an attempt to extract German financing for a platform Paris control. Germany’s patience is fraying. One German MP described FCAS as “not a strategic necessity but an industrial trophy” for Dassault. What makes the current moment particularly consequential is the shift in the underlying power dynamic. When FCAS began, Germany’s defence spending was modest. Now, Berlin expects to spend €150bn by 2029, nearly twice France’s budget. Germany is no longer willing to play a deferential role, and France’s Rafale export success means Dassault has little commercial incentive to compromise.
Achieving strategic autonomy requires three elements, industrial integration, political trust and joint defense strategy. Europe has the technological know-how and resources. However, the political will to share sovereignty in areas such as defense production is still in question. Without harmonization between the two leading European powers, Germany and France, European autonomy will be prone to splintering into multiple parallel national projects rather than a single security framework. Furthermore, the ambition for autonomy in Europe must not be conflated with a disconnection from NATO. Rather, it represents a more balanced relationship between Europe and the United States, where Europe has meaningful capabilities. However, division within Europe undermines its leverage and credibility. Without success in flagship programs such as FCAS, the ambition to be an autonomous security provider will remain a dream rather than a reality.
The project is on the brink of collapse because of the controversial approaches between Germany and France. Despite having a deadline till December 2025, to make final decisions about its implementation, neither side commented on making a compromise. The delay or failure of FCAS leads both countries to make costly interim upgrades in their Rafale and Eurofighter jets, which weakens the implementation of the project. Furthermore, there is another project signed altogether with FCAS in 2017, the Main Ground Combat System, that can fail if FCAS is not achieved. Also, it could lead to fragmentation in European air power as the countries could rely on buying fighter jets from the US Next Generation Air Dominance(NGAD) or Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) of the United Kingdom, Italy and Japan. For all the talk of reducing European industry fragmentation, the continent could end up with different sixth-generation fighter programmes. At a moment when Europe urgently needs to demonstrate strategic coherence, the FCAS crisis reveals just how fragile its foundations remain.
In this regard, the split between Germany and France in the FCAS program is more than a difference in aircraft design and industrial participation. It is a representation of a larger strategic issue, whether Europe can move beyond the national interests of defense to build an integrated security framework. Without resolving these contradictions, Europe’s dependence on external security guarantees will continue. However, if it manages to do so, the FCAS program could become the bedrock of a more autonomous and strategically integrated Europe.
* The Institute for Advanced International Studies (IAIS) does not take institutional positions on any issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IAIS.
