Germany might *think* it can join GCAP, but... 1. There can be no entry of Germany without complete, explicit agreement of ๐ฎ๐น๐ฏ๐ต - UK cannot "force" this, nor can Germany. 2. What has Germany got to offer, technology-wise, which is not already covered by the 3 partners? Zip.
3. "But we need Germany's money!" Nope - Japan's entry solved that. And there are 2 extra partners in the wings, so Berlin's Bounty ain't what it was. 4. "But we need Germany's offtake!" Nope - US Sec AF says NGAD is economic at 200, pretty much what Tempest is looking at.
5. France is right: why tie your programme to @Bundestag procedures,which require 6mth assessments, approvals for any sums over โฌ50m? Japan will veto this. Can you trust ๐ฉ๐ช? 6. And bearing in mind current stand off over ๐ธ๐ฆ and Typhoon, ๐ฌ๐ง/๐ฎ๐น need ๐ฉ๐ช like a hole in the head.
7. Even if there are "assurances" about exports today, can they be banked on? No. 8. Germany hasn't worked out the Future Fighter situation: when SCAF music stops, Berlin will be the one with no partner to dance with.
Hey, buy more F-35s! Bye-bye local aerospace industry...
Hmmm... Have the planets just aligned in a manner that might see French aid to Ukraine go up a gear? French Defence Minister, @SebLecornu has just been in Kyiv to discuss supply of weaponry to Ukraine.
He has "confirmed" that there have been talks, not just now, about supplying Mirage 2000s to Kyiv. But there have been *good reasons* why this has not happened to date: the M2000 fleet has taken the lead in Sahel operations, to free up Rafale for other missions.
But France has been *asked to leave* by Mali, Burkina Faso, and now Niger. And Niger was where the 4-5 M2000s were based for regional missions. OK, so the withdrawal is for the end of 2023, but wait! That's in about 10wks time! air-cosmos.com/article/niger-โฆ
OK, the Sheldon Report is fatally flawed for one simple point (actually, it is flawed from numerous points, some deliberately put in place by the @DefenceHQ): the analysis of "what went wrong" only starts in detail in 2017. The problem with this? The key problems started...
Prior to the contract being awarded. An example required? Notes from 2010 say that a briefing General stating that Pizarro 2 was in service, low risk etc. So what? Well, it had actually been cancelled in Spain about a year earlier as a response to the global financial crisis...
So, the decision to opt for that base platform was utterly flawed from the off, before the @BritishArmy piled idiocy upon idiocy.
And there are at least half a dozen defence journos who will attest to the first stories about "things going wrong with Ajax" started c.2015-16...
...the mice are scurrying in all directions about the state of the RN escort fleet. I've now had half doz sources - all in the same capability area - coming up with the same thing in the aftermath of the de factor retirement of HMS Westminster. She's not the last to see this.
Now, this could all be circular talk - it happens. But triangulating sources is suggestive that there is a kernel of summat going on here. The "name in the frame" is HMS Lancaster, the forward deployed Type 23.
Late Friday/this Monday have been v interesting as regards the quiet, background briefs that have been going the rounds about the Defence Command White Paper, especially what will happen to the Army.
Top Line: the White Paper will say previous version was absolutely fine...
...all assumptions deductions totally right, Ukraine has changed nothing, because 2021 version had foreseen it!
However, Army White Paper Top Line: the briefings say a cut to 60,000.
Yes, the "line to take" is 60,000 - the previous total talked up was 72,000...
@benmoores2@BritishArmy@DefenceHQ@DefenceU
Now, Ukraine will be thankful for pretty much anything that they get. But recent statements suggest that they want 2-300 MBTs, 600+ MICVs, 00s of arty. So, let's be honest, what is the use of "up to 10 CR2"?
It's not even a squadron in NATO parlance - it's not a coherent unit, it's just a handful of tanks. Now, it might be that 10 is all that can be brought up, which the UK can then give to Ukraine without denuding the Army of armour...
A thread about an intriguing story that came via Reuters on 3 January about leadership of the NATO Very high-readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF). The core (original) story? Germany, the current VJTF leader, was being asked to extend this role into 2024... reuters.com/world/europe/gโฆ
So what? Well, in theory, the UK takes over the role as of 1 January 2024. Berlin being asked to extend by 3-4mths, minimum, suggests that the British Army is finding itself in a position where, for whatever reasons, it cannot generate a formed Bgde HQ...