Faced with tensions over the European fighter jet project, France and Spain reaffirm their commitment while Germany remains reserved.
Summary
The Future Combat Air System (FCAS) is Europe’s major project to create a sixth-generation fighter jet and its associated systems. Initiated by France, Germany, and Spain, this program aims to replace the French Rafale and German and Spanish Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft by 2040 and to strengthen European strategic autonomy. In recent weeks, Paris and Madrid have publicly reaffirmed their confidence in the program’s progress during trilateral discussions, despite the absence of official comments from Berlin. Germany has preferred to keep the content of the discussions confidential, reflecting persistent industrial and political disagreements, particularly regarding the division of responsibilities between Dassault Aviation and Airbus Defence and Space, and the technological contribution of each partner. This context highlights significant budgetary, industrial, and diplomatic issues at a time when Europe is seeking to consolidate its autonomous air defense.
The SCAF project: objectives and technological configuration
The Future Combat Air System (FCAS) is an ambitious European program whose objective is to develop a sixth-generation combat aircraft capable of replacing the aircraft currently in service by 2035–2040.
Unlike a simple aircraft, the SCAF is designed as a “system of systems” integrating several interconnected components. It includes a new generation aircraft (New Generation Fighter, NGF) accompanied by remote carriers and a real-time data network, sometimes referred to as Combat Cloud. This network is intended to enable close coordination between piloted and unmanned platforms, improving situational awareness, detection, and decision-making capabilities in contested environments.
The NGF is expected to represent a technological leap forward in terms of stealth, sensors, connectivity, and data processing capabilities, surpassing what exists today, including fifth-generation aircraft such as the American F-35 Lightning II. The integration of drones and the cloud is part of the strategy to reduce operational risks and increase mission flexibility.
The SCAF must integrate with existing capabilities such as the French Rafale and the German and Spanish Eurofighter Typhoon, while preparing allied forces for a future multi-domain combat scenario. This level of technical and operational integration requires close coordination between the industries involved, notably Dassault Aviation, Airbus Defence and Space, Safran, Thales, and Indra Sistemas.
The political context of recent discussions
In a recent trilateral meeting in Berlin, France and Spain publicly reaffirmed their commitment to the SCAF, emphasizing their willingness to continue studying the conditions for moving to a more advanced demonstrator and development phase. Official statements emphasized the importance of maintaining cooperation and working toward a future aircraft and a complete combat system.
In contrast, Germany was reluctant to share concrete details, indicating that the content of the discussions would remain confidential. This position has been interpreted by several analysts as a sign of persistent disagreements between Berlin and its partners, particularly on industrial distribution, the role of each manufacturer, and the technological direction of the program.
At the same time, some reports indicate that Germany may be considering reducing its involvement, potentially focusing on specific aspects of the program such as unmanned systems or the Combat Cloud, rather than the aircraft itself.
These discussions come after several months of tension, with Berlin reportedly considering new partners such as Sweden or the United Kingdom if the disagreements with Paris remained too deep.
Industrial and governance issues
One of the key sticking points is the industrial relationship between Dassault Aviation and Airbus Defense and Space. The French company often wants to retain a major role in the development of the NGF, while Airbus, supported by certain German circles, advocates a more balanced distribution of responsibilities between the partners.
This rivalry has led to union pressure in Germany, where the IG Metall union has threatened to withdraw its support for the cooperation if Dassault retains a dominant position, arguing that this would disadvantage German industry.
The industrial complexity also stems from the presence of numerous subcontractors in different countries, each with specific economic interests. Building such a vast system involves thousands of highly skilled jobs, massive investments in research and development, and work-sharing rules that must satisfy all parties.
The governance of the program is therefore as strategic as it is technical. Without a clear agreement on who will lead which parts of the development, delays will accumulate and the risk of the cooperation breaking down will increase, which could compromise the initial schedule.
European budget: costs, delays, and trade-offs
The SCAF is a very large-scale European arms program, with an estimated cost of several tens of billions of euros, often cited as around €100 billion (~$116 billion) over its entire lifetime, from design to production and support.
This level of investment is unprecedented in previous European fighter aircraft programs. It reflects both the complexity of the technologies to be developed and the European Union’s ambition to assert strategic autonomy in defense, reducing its dependence on external suppliers.
However, delays in political and industrial discussions may further increase costs. In any major aerospace program, each year of delay weighs on the total budget, not only in terms of direct R&D expenditure, but also in terms of personnel, infrastructure, and project management. For a project as large as the SCAF, this can amount to billions of euros in additional costs if major delays persist.
On the other hand, the redistribution of responsibilities between countries has direct consequences on national economic benefits. Countries that obtain a larger share of the industrial work derive significant economic advantages, both in terms of jobs and future exports. This is one of the reasons why the governance of the program is such a sensitive issue.
Technology transfers and sovereign capabilities
One of the arguments in favor of SCAF is the possibility of transferring advanced technologies between partners. The simultaneous development of a sixth-generation aircraft, autonomous drones, and a secure data network requires advanced innovations in the fields of stealth, artificial intelligence, sensors, and communications.
European cooperation can enable each country to benefit from an expanded technological base, reducing duplication of national efforts and sharing R&D costs. This is particularly relevant for technologies that few countries have mastered on their own, such as real-time data fusion software, stealth materials, and secure network architectures.
However, technology transfers are often at the heart of industrial disputes. Companies want to protect certain know-how and their market shares, leading to complex negotiations on what can be shared, what must remain exclusive, and how to organize the intellectual property of the resulting innovations.
The future of the program and its alternatives
While Paris and Madrid are reaffirming their faith in SCAF, Berlin’s reserved attitude leaves substantial uncertainty about the program’s future. Ongoing discussions, including among European political leaders, will aim to answer these questions by the end of the year, with a summit planned where heads of state are expected to weigh the options.
Some analysts even raise the possibility that Europe could split into several similar programs, for example by joining or cooperating more closely with the Global Combat Air Program (GCAP), led by the United Kingdom, Italy, and Japan, whose schedule is slightly more advanced.
Another alternative would be to focus European efforts on elements of the system such as the Combat Cloud or autonomous drones, while scaling back the NGF’s ambitions, a scenario that some officials have considered if political obstacles persist.
Different perspectives on European defense
The evolution of the SCAF reflects a broader debate about Europe’s ability to carry out ambitious defense programs in cooperation. Political and industrial differences highlight issues of sovereignty, industrial fairness, and strategic vision. Thus, the evolution of the SCAF will be a key indicator of Europe’s maturity in autonomous defense over the coming decades.
Sources
Breaking Defense, France, Spain reassert faith in Europe’s next-gen future fighter, but Germany stays mum.
Reuters, Germany, France, Spain move to end deadlock in fighter jet dispute.
Reuters, Powerful German union calls for Dassault’s expulsion from fighter jet program.
Wikipedia, Future Combat Air System (FCAS).
Wikipedia, Future Combat Air System (FCAS).
Valeurs Actuelles, France and Germany could abandon their future fighter jet project in favor of a combat cloud.
Live a unique fighter jet experience