Reference News Network, July 8 report: The website of the U.S. "New York Times" published an article on July 6 titled "Europe's Dilemma: Develop Domestic Defense Industry or Continue Relying on the United States," authored by Steven Erlanger and Jenna Smylie, here is the translation:

European countries have pledged to nearly double their military investments over the next decade and hope this will promote the development of their domestic defense industry. However, it remains unclear whether this funding—amounting up to 1.4 trillion euros—can drive high-end military innovation in Europe. This is known as the so-called "F-35 Dilemma."

Europe lacks quality alternatives to replace some defense equipment produced by American defense companies. One such example is the famous stealth fighter jet F-35 produced by Lockheed Martin, whose advanced performance is unmatched by European counterparts. Moreover, because many European countries have already invested in American weapon systems, they want new procurement to maintain compatibility.

These investment commitments have already sparked contradictions. Should European countries develop their own defense industry? Is the Ukraine war and Russia's "military threat" allowing Europe a long preparation period? Or should Europe continue to invest—at least to some extent—in existing American cutting-edge technology?

When discussing how to answer these questions, European officials are taking a compromise approach. Officials have set limits on spending used for purchasing American equipment, including the EU's flagship defense financing plan—a loan arrangement worth 150 billion euros aimed at promoting joint procurement. However, most procurement will be done individually by each country, with the freedom to allocate resources as they see fit.

With the U.S. reducing support for Ukraine, this expenditure debate has become more urgent. The Trump administration recently announced a pause in sending weapons to Ukraine, forcing European allies to increase related investments.

Charles Grant, director of the European Reform Center think tank, said that there are basically two views on the military spending boom in Europe. One view is strongly supported by French officials and EU institutions, advocating limiting the use of funds and prioritizing the development of European defense industry. This is especially important because Europeans do not want to rely too much on what they consider unreliable U.S. allies.

Northern and Baltic states as well as Poland support another view, arguing that Europe needs to immediately enhance its military strength to assist Ukraine and adopt a more open procurement strategy. Grant said, "These countries believe we cannot be idealists and need to take immediate action to increase spending for Ukraine."

Polish officials believe both approaches can coexist. As one of the European countries with the highest proportion of defense spending in national income, Poland mainly purchases advanced weapons from the United States. Officials stated that given the increased funding that European countries will invest, they can invest in developing local industries while purchasing American specialized equipment.

Poland's Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski told reporters in Warsaw last month, "From the perspective of national budgets, most European countries, except France, will likely continue to purchase large amounts of weapons from the United States."

But he pointed out that if Europe is to independently confront Russia as the U.S. wishes, it also needs to build a "enhanced defense industry" with greater production capacity.

Sikorski said, "We cannot import everything from the United States."

This mixed strategy means that Europe is likely to continue relying on U.S. key technologies. Some officials are worried that Washington may stop providing key software updates in the future, a concern exacerbated by Trump's occasional doubts about NATO commitments and his softening stance towards Russia.

Taking the F-35 fighter jet as an example, purchasing this fighter jet, which costs as much as $80 million (about 68 million euros), means the buyer must establish a long-term partnership with the manufacturer to obtain technical upgrades. Considering the recent turbulence in the transatlantic alliance, officials from Portugal, Canada, and Denmark have raised doubts about their plans to procure this aircraft.

This exposes the reality faced by European countries. They have no equivalent substitute for this fifth-generation fighter jet, while the U.S. has already started developing the sixth-generation fighter jet.

Claudia Majore, a security expert at the German Marshall Fund, pointed out that this dilemma partly explains the view held by officials from the Nordic countries and Germany: even if communication with U.S. President Trump is not smooth, Europe needs to maintain good relations with U.S. defense companies. (Translated by Yang Xuele)

Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7524517434649379364/

Statement: This article represents the personal views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking the [Up/Down] buttons below.