Compared to first-rate military powers, European countries are small. Simple approximations (adjusted for local spending power) show the continent’s militaries are short of major military assets.
Tanks, advanced combat planes (4th or 5th generation fighters), submarines, and aircraft carriers all showcase Europe’s comparable weakness. In sum, Europe spends about $300bn on defense, just above a third of the US annual outlay.
Europe has about 5,000 main battle tanks across the continent, but many are old, many are not operational, and they consist of a constellation of Leopards, legacy Soviet systems and their derivatives (e.g. the T-72, PT-91), Arietes, and Leclercs.
Europe has over 1,000 advanced combat planes, likewise consisting of various platforms at various readiness levels (e.g. the Eurofighter, F-35, Gripen, Rafale). Many EU countries don’t operate submarines at all, there are under 60 subs spread across EU operators. Most glaringly, the EU only has one conventional aircraft carrier – the French nuclear-powered Charles de Gaulle. The Spanish Juan Carlos is a repurposed amphibious assault ship, the Italian carriers are smaller VTOL (vertical take-off and landing) carriers.
In contrast, China has up to 6,000 main battle tanks, a growing fleet of 60-plus submarines, perhaps up to 1,600 advanced combat planes, and will soon field three conventional aircraft carriers.
Although many EU countries have realized their military capabilities leave much to be desired and are allocating greater resources towards defense, the smorgasbord of different platforms and piecemeal efforts means a lot of money will be wasted.
Every vehicle, plane, and ship requires its own set of technical experts, logistics, and administration to enable their development and maintenance.
European countries often support national champions. But because individual EU countries are relatively small, the military assets to be purchased will almost always be expensive and limited in number. For instance, the French Leclerc tank costs approximately 20-50% more per vehicle to manufacture than an American M1 Abrams, and its production line was previously closed. This lack of scale makes weapons systems not only more expensive to governments and potential export markets, but also makes it difficult to increase output amid uncertain and volatile order books.
Europe could benefit immensely by integrating its procurement process and standardizing major military assets.
Capabilities are similar across high-quality Western platforms; there is little material tradeoff from fielding a Leopard II tank instead of a M1 Abrams, but there are major tradeoffs in terms of upfront costs, development, logistics, and upkeep. What if every European nation used the same main battle tank? Can the Polish army not use the Leopard II tank instead of the Korean K2 tank that it has ordered? Can the Italians not use the Eurocopter Tiger?
What if aircraft carriers were purchased from a central source and allocated to individual states? By creating a single mass procurement approach, EU countries would reap the same benefits of scale across nations as the US without compromising sovereign command structures.
This is only an excerpt from the article. You can read the full version on the CEPA website.
