Fighter aircraft type: Eurofighter Typhoon
The Franco-German fighter jet project FCAS has collapsed amid the dispute between Airbus and Dassault. But a new option could now open up for Germany: the GCAP alliance of the United Kingdom, Italy and Japan is signaling openness to German participation. The defense debacle could therefore become not only a setback, but also a chance for a new European-international defense axis.
After the collapse of the Franco-German fighter jet project FCAS, a new opportunity is emerging for Germany. The existing fighter jet alliance GCAP, supported by the United Kingdom, Italy and Japan, has signaled openness to German participation. Leonardo CEO Lorenzo Mariani told Reuters that Germany would be a »strong and valuable partner« for the program.
This is not yet a political decision and not an official accession. Mariani explicitly emphasized that the admission of new partners was not in his hands. Nevertheless, the signal is remarkable. It comes immediately after the failure of the Franco-German-Spanish FCAS project, which had long been regarded as a European prestige project for the next generation of fighter aircraft.
FCAS was originally intended to replace Germany’s Eurofighters and France’s Rafale jets from 2040 onward. But the dispute between Dassault and Airbus over leadership, work shares, technology access and industrial responsibility could not be resolved. Chancellor Friedrich Merz and French President Emmanuel Macron ultimately concluded that the companies involved would not come together in developing a joint combat aircraft.
A setback could become a new axis
The Global Combat Air Programme, or GCAP, is pursuing a similar goal to FCAS: the development of a next-generation combat aircraft that combines manned and unmanned systems, sensors, data networking and modern weapons systems. According to current plans, the new jet is expected to be operational around 2035.
So far, the project is supported by the United Kingdom, Italy and Japan. Its industrial partners include BAE Systems, Leonardo and Japan’s aerospace industry around Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. For Germany, participation would be strategically interesting because it could provide access to a program that is already underway.
That is precisely where the political appeal lies. After the FCAS collapse, Berlin must decide how the German armed forces are to be equipped with next-generation combat aircraft in the long term. A purely national approach would be expensive, technologically difficult and politically hard to justify. Participation in GCAP, by contrast, could enable a new international division of labor.
More than a fighter jet
The debate, however, goes beyond the aircraft itself. Modern air combat systems no longer consist only of a plane. Sensors, drones, data processing, artificial intelligence, electronic warfare and a networked so-called combat cloud are decisive. That is exactly why FCAS was originally planned as a comprehensive system of systems.
Even after the end of the joint fighter aircraft, individual FCAS components could continue to be developed. This applies above all to networking, drone support and digital combat management. Germany now faces the question of whether these components can be connected in another form within a new partner framework.
Participation in GCAP would therefore not simply be a switch from one jet project to another. It could change Germany’s entire air defense strategy. Berlin would align itself more strongly with the United Kingdom, Italy and Japan – moving away from the previous Franco-German focus.
France loses more than a project
For Europe, this is sensitive. The failure of FCAS is not only a technical or industrial defeat, but also a political signal. France and Germany wanted to use the project to show that Europe could manage major defense programs on its own. Now it has once again become clear how difficult European defense cooperation becomes when national industrial interests, leadership claims and military requirements diverge.
France wanted to secure a strong role for Dassault in FCAS. Germany did not want Airbus to be reduced to a junior role. Spain was also involved, but could not resolve the underlying conflict. In the end, the project failed less because of a lack of money than because of a lack of agreement.
That is precisely why GCAP now appears more attractive. The program is already more clearly structured, has 3 strong partners in the United Kingdom, Italy and Japan, and is expected to become available earlier than FCAS. Italy has already approved a financing framework of almost 9 billion euros for GCAP, although total costs are likely to be significantly higher in the end.
Germany faces a fundamental decision
For Merz and the federal government, the situation is uncomfortable, but not hopeless. Germany needs an answer to the question of what comes after the end of the joint FCAS fighter jet. The Bundeswehr cannot afford years of strategic uncertainty, especially as Russia remains a threat in Europe and NATO is pushing for significantly higher defense capabilities.
Joining GCAP would not be without political risk. It could strain relations with France and further weaken the already difficult Franco-German defense cooperation. At the same time, it could open up a more realistic path for Berlin to remain technologically involved in the next generation of air combat systems.
Nothing has been decided yet. But the signal from the GCAP alliance changes the situation. The FCAS collapse does not automatically have to mean that Germany loses touch in the race for the next fighter jet. It could also mark the beginning of a new defense axis – less romantically European, but possibly more pragmatic.
SK
