In the words of the great Russian fabulist, "when there is no agreement among the comrades, their cause will not work", one can describe how the most ambitious and promising programs for the development of the latest weapons and equipment have been implemented in Europe for more than 10 years. TASS — about how NATO allies quarrel
First of all, we are talking about the sixth generation aviation complexes: FCAS of France, Spain and Germany, GCAP of Britain, Italy and Japan, as well as their land-based counterpart MGCS. Officials never tire of saying that all three initiatives are successfully developing. However, several countries participating in these projects have recently expressed their dissatisfaction with the atmosphere in which the work is taking place.
The message of each and every one of them is universal unification for the fastest, most efficient and cheapest development of the most advanced weapons. Such initiatives are in the interests of any of the EU countries, especially in such turbulent times as now.
The only one who, apparently, has not yet been able to comprehend this message is the European defense industry. For her, joining forces for a common goal always seems simple only on paper.
The swan rushes into the clouds...
The most striking example of this is the current Franco—German-Spanish FCAS/SCAF (Future Combar Air System / Système de Combat Aérien du Futur) program. To this day, the companies involved in the creation of the latest fighter aircraft and combat support drones for it cannot agree on intellectual property rights, the distribution of roles and the amount of work that each of them will undertake.
The Vicissitudes of FCAS
In fact, back in 2012, FCAS was launched by the United Kingdom in order to create a promising drone. Over time, the idea changed, and in 2015, the new official concept of the kingdom's armed forces referred to FCAS as the "aircraft of the future", designed to replace Eurofighter Typhoon fighters in the future.
In order to increase the competitiveness of the development, foreign partners began to be invited to participate in the program. In 2018, the concept of the future Tempest fighter was presented. At that time, as stated, companies from Italy, France and Germany had already participated in its development. In the same year, however, Berlin and Paris announced the launch of their own FCAS/SCAF initiative to create a sixth-generation fighter.
According to one version, both programs existed in parallel, according to the other, it was a single project based on different interstate agreements. In 2019, Spain officially became a member of the Franco-German FCAS, and Italy officially became a member of the British FCAS. Sweden was expected to join, and Belgium joined the program as an observer in 2023.
The UK's withdrawal from the EU in 2020 finalized the division of these initiatives into two separate ones. Since then, FCAS has increasingly been referred to as Tempest in the United Kingdom.
The key industrial participant of FCAS is the Airbus concern from Germany, the Dassault aircraft group from France, and the Indra holding company from Spain. And if the disputes between the first two media outlets have been retold several times, little was known about what the Spanish side thinks about this issue until recently.
Portal Infodefensa.com Citing knowledgeable sources in the Spanish Ministry of Defense and Industry, he reported on April 22 that the current situation around FCAS has caused "discomfort", "malaise" or even "irritation" both in the military and among national defense manufacturers.
The main irritant in this sense is Paris. Moreover, as the publication pointed out, similar feelings in Madrid are experienced by French companies involved in the design of the promising MGCS (Main Ground Combat System) main battle tank, although Spain is not formally involved in this program yet.
The reason for such passive aggression is most likely that any company that has assumed a leadership role in a major defense program uses its privileged position and tries to take over all key aspects of development.
This was the case, for example, with the Eurofighter program. France eventually withdrew from it precisely because of disagreement with the rest of the participating countries about the appearance, layout and characteristics of the fighter, known today as Typhoon.
The paradox, according to the interlocutors of Infodefensa, is that nothing has changed since then. The companies that coordinate key European initiatives hold a similar position today. Moreover, even in a situation where the governments of the countries of the continent — it seems for the first time in history — agree to invest in joint projects and jointly achieve the industrial and military-technological sovereignty of the EU.
Since 2020, the French have repeatedly stated the disagreements prevailing in FCAS. Currently, the program is undergoing stage 1B, related to the design of a flight prototype of the future NGF fighter (Next-Generation Fighter).
This work is led by Dassault, and its main partner is Airbus. A few years ago, there was a conflict between the firms regarding the distribution of roles in the creation of NGF.
According to some reports, it was resolved at the end of 2022 by signing a new partnership agreement, while according to others, it has not been resolved so far. All this led to the postponement of the plan to adopt the aircraft in France, Spain and Germany until 2040.
At the same time, without abandoning its claims to leadership in FCAS, France continues to modernize the national Rafale fighter. Moreover, there have been repeated remarks in Paris that the country is quite capable of creating a sixth-generation fighter on its own, which it will not share with any other European state.
Dassault (with the participation of five other EU countries, however) even designed the nEUROn heavy drone, which is supposed to serve as a "reliable wingman" for the Rafale of the most modern modification. Both, according to the plans of the French aircraft manufacturer, will be ready for adoption 10 years earlier than FCAS — in the 2030s. According to the characteristics, such an airline complex will not have any special differences from the latter.
In early April, the head of Dassault, Eric Trapier, speaking at the French National Assembly, noted the success of the nEUROn program. He attributed this fact to Paris' leading position in its development and the fact that the contract for its creation provided for all stages of work right up to flight tests.
"In FCAS, on the contrary, now everything is divided into parts," said Trapier, whose words were quoted by Zone Militaire. — We have stage 1A, 1B, now we will need to negotiate stage 2. It is difficult and time-consuming. I'm not sure if this is an effective interaction model."
Expressing his skepticism about the viability of the Franco-German-Spanish program, the head of Dassault once again stated that "it is not easy to dispel doubts from someone who has them." He stressed that if earlier it was possible to expect that the airline complex would be ready by 2040, then taking into account current realities it is unlikely to succeed.
...Cancer is backing away...
The situation is similar today with GCAP (Global Combat Air Program). The British corporation BAE Systems, the Italian holding Leonardo, and the Japanese consortium JAIEC (which includes Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and SIAC), which are implementing this program, planned to begin deliveries of their sixth-generation airliners around 2035.
GCAP: for three
London, Rome and Tokyo signed a trilateral agreement on the establishment of GCAP in December 2022. In fact, GCAP is just a continuation of the Tempest program with a new additional participant. The prototype fighter aircraft being built by the three countries still bears that name.
It is planned that it will replace the Typhoon aircraft of the British and Italian air forces, as well as the F-2 of the Japanese Air Self-Defense Forces. By analogy with FCAS/SCAF, the fighter being created as part of GCAP is promised to be equipped with artificial intelligence, advanced weapons, an interactive digital cockpit, modern sensors and a next-generation airborne radar station. However, until now, only a very schematic mock-up of the future aircraft has been presented to the world.
On December 13, 2024, the parties announced the launch of a joint venture that will work on the design and development of components for a promising airline complex, and a little earlier, the opening of the headquarters of the interstate managing organization for this project, GIGO. Saudi Arabia, India, Canada and Australia are also showing interest in this initiative.
However, not so long ago, serious "internal tensions" were reported in Italy, which are observed among partner countries. Republic's Defense Minister Guido Crosetto has publicly expressed his concern that the UK is unwilling to fully share with other GCAP countries the key technologies that are embedded in this aviation complex.
In an interview with Reuters on April 15, 2025, Crosetto emphasized the strategic importance of an initiative like GCAP. At the same time, he warned that the success of such cooperation depends on equality in relations between partners. "Sharing technologies, subject to joint investments, is categorically important in order for such relations to be considered serious," he stressed.
The Italian minister criticized the British side, calling on it to break down the "barriers of selfishness," as Rome and Tokyo have already done definitively. "There is no one else who can be considered a primary or secondary partner and who would like to continue to adhere to the outdated concept of interaction," he said, emphasizing the difference in positions on this issue between Italy and Japan on the one hand and Great Britain on the other.
Crosetto also reiterated Italy's intention to support Saudi Arabia if it applies to join the GCAP. He argued that in addition to the need for technological growth, Riyadh also has the necessary financial resources to make a significant contribution to the initiative.
Expanding the range of GCAP participants, among other things, would reduce the unit cost of creating a promising airline complex. Although, on the other hand, this is fraught with additional difficulties regarding the exchange of technologies and the distribution of roles in the program.
Crosetto did not specify which technologies related to GCAP the United Kingdom prefers to keep with itself. His comments only make it clear that the friction between the parties has arisen in one of the fundamental areas of cooperation, which involves technological interaction at all stages of the joint development of a promising product.
The British Ministry of Defense, in turn, did not agree with Crosetto's statements. As noted by the Aviacionline portal, the official representative of the department, in his communique distributed by e-mail, called GCAP "an outstanding example of cohesion" that participants in the multinational weapons development program have ever demonstrated.
He assured that "the technologies that are being created and the products that are being produced jointly [within the GCAP] represent the pinnacle of scientific research and engineering design thought." "Together we will launch one of the most technologically advanced combat aircraft in the world," concluded the representative of the British Ministry of Defense.
Anyway, Infodefensa believes that the continued existence of this ambitious venture will largely depend on whether the conflict between GCAP partners regarding technology exchange is resolved. The main challenge will be to maintain political and industrial unity within the program.
... And the Pike pulls into the water
The situation with MGCS resembles FCAS in many ways. The initiative is actually aimed at developing not just the latest tank to replace the German Leopard and the French Leclerc, but a whole family of crewed and unmanned ground combat vehicles that would interact with each other in a single circuit.
It has been in existence since 2017 — not as long as FCAS. However, the problems are generally the same. Each of the large companies involved in the development of promising combat vehicles is trying to seize the initiative and bring in as many of their own developments as possible.
The mutual disagreements of the parties even gave rise to rumors about the cancellation of the program. In order to avoid this, the authorities of France and Germany had to intervene in 2023. Then the heads of the military departments of the two countries, Sebastien Lecorny and Boris Pistorius, agreed to do everything possible to make the project happen, and agreed to hold regular meetings to discuss progress in the implementation of the initiative.
We are ours, we will build a new tank.
Formally, the MGCS program is managed by KNDS. Rheinmetall joined it later, and since then the parties have been unable to agree on the technological solutions used and the distribution of responsibilities among themselves.
Thus, the German concern is promoting its own version of a promising combat vehicle with a 130-millimeter cannon and an automatic loader. The French division of KNDS also proposes to create it based on the Leclerc tank with a fundamentally new 140 mm ASCALON cannon (Autoloaded and Scalable Outperforming Gun), firing telescopic ammunition and guided missiles.
The opinion that the parties will not be able to complete the project has been repeatedly voiced by experts, representatives of the authorities of both states and the defense industry. Among the latter are Zuzanna Wiegand, head of the Renk military industrial concern, and Armin Papperger, head of Rheinmetall itself.
In order to give additional impetus to the development of a pan—European MBT, the participating companies of the initiative (both KNDS divisions, the German Rheinmetall concern and the French Thales group) recently completed the creation of the MGCS joint design bureau in Cologne.
German Reserve Colonel Stefan Gramolla was appointed its first Director general. The bureau itself will finalize the overall MGCS concept and its eight technological components.
According to the current plan, the promising MBT should enter service with partner countries by 2035-2040. In the meantime, the program is at the design stage of the main components.
At various times, more than one European country has shown interest in this initiative. These include Poland, Sweden, Lithuania, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands and Italy. The latter almost became a full member of MGCS last year, until the Leonardo national holding company quarreled with KNDS and severed the corresponding strategic partnership with it.
Spain also submitted an official application to join the program in 2024. And although it remains unanswered so far, the financing plan for the "special modernization programs" of the kingdom's armed forces PEM (Programas Especiales de Modernización) for 2025, unveiled by the country's cabinet on April 23, includes an article of €5 million for the development of a next-generation tank to replace the Leopard and Leclerc MBT by 2040. As noted in Infodefensa, this description is a hint that Madrid is determined to join MGCS this year.
It is noteworthy that Spain, along with 12 other European countries (excluding France), is already a participant in the new EU-funded MARTE advanced MBT program launched last year. The key players in this initiative are the German division of KNDS and Rheinmetall. At the same time, the latter is simultaneously working on its own project of a modern main battle tank based on the KF51.
But France did not stand aside either. Last year, a similar initiative, FMBTech (Technologies for Existing and Future Main Battle Tanks), appeared on the list of EU-funded joint programs under the joint leadership of companies from this country.
On April 22, Thales, which is involved in it, announced its "official" launch with the participation of 26 industrial partners from 14 European countries. The goal is still the same: to get a promising combat vehicle by about 2035 or later. Previously, it is planned to develop next-generation technological components that could simultaneously modernize existing Leopard and Leclerc.
Both MARTE and FMBTech are funded by the European Defense Fund (EDF). In both cases, we are talking about allocating almost €20 million in the coming years, and this is only for the initial stage of development.
In this regard, experts have repeatedly asked the question: what is the future fate of MGCS and whether it will be associated with new programs? And if the main membership of MARTE and FMBTech proves the existence of such a connection, then the distribution of leadership roles in them — Germany on the one hand, and France on the other — only says that "who is still there."
Konstantin Alysh
