Belgium Reconsiders FCAS Role Amid F-35 Purchase Criticism

Belgium Reconsiders FCAS Role After Dassault CEO Slams F-35 Purchase

Belgium’s defense policy is under renewed scrutiny following high-profile criticism from Dassault Aviation CEO Éric Trappier. The controversy centers around Belgium’s recent decision to expand its fleet of U.S.-made F-35 fighter jets while simultaneously seeking deeper involvement in the European Future Combat Air System (FCAS) program. This dual-track strategy has raised questions about national loyalty, industrial policy, and the future of collaborative European defense initiatives.

The clash underscores a broader tension within the European defense landscape: how to balance sovereign procurement decisions with the collective ambition to reduce reliance on non-European technologies. For Belgium, a NATO member with deep transatlantic ties, the decision to invest in American-built jets while aspiring to benefit from a pan-European defense program is both strategic and controversial.

This article explores the background of Belgium’s involvement in FCAS, the recent developments that triggered a diplomatic and industrial backlash, and the broader implications for European defense cooperation and sovereignty.

Understanding FCAS and Belgium’s Position

The Future Combat Air System (FCAS) is a joint European defense initiative led by France, Germany, and Spain. Its goal is to develop a sixth-generation fighter jet and an integrated system of systems, including unmanned aerial vehicles and a secure combat cloud. The project is seen as a cornerstone of European defense sovereignty, aiming to replace current fighter fleets such as the Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon, and F-18 by 2040.

Belgium joined the FCAS program in 2023 as an observer, committing €360 million. The country has expressed interest in becoming a full partner by 2026, with an additional €300 million earmarked for Phase 2 of the program. This involvement is seen as a strategic move to secure industrial participation and align with broader EU defense goals.

However, Belgium’s parallel procurement of 45 F-35 fighter jets from the United States, 34 initially ordered in 2018 and 11 more in 2025, has complicated its position. The additional 11 jets cost approximately €1.67 billion, a significant investment that has drawn criticism from some European defense stakeholders.

Strategic Motivations and Industrial Participation

Belgium’s interest in FCAS is driven by several factors. Firstly, participation in a major European defense project offers opportunities for domestic industry through subcontracting and technology transfers. Secondly, aligning with EU defense initiatives helps meet political and strategic objectives, including reduced dependency on non-European suppliers.

Despite these motivations, Belgium’s F-35 procurement is based on operational and logistical considerations. The F-35 is a proven platform with NATO interoperability and advanced capabilities. Its acquisition allows Belgium to replace its aging F-16 fleet with minimal disruption.

Moreover, the F-35s ordered by Belgium are assembled in Italy, which some officials argue still contributes to the European defense industrial base. However, critics contend that design and intellectual property remain firmly American, limiting Europe’s strategic autonomy.

“If [Belgium] gives up the idea of buying F-35s, they’d be welcome. If not, it’s really making a monkey out of us.” – Éric Trappier, CEO of Dassault Aviation

Financial and Political Stakes

The FCAS program is currently in Phase 1B, with a budget of €3.2 billion allocated for 2022–2025. The total cost of the program is projected to exceed €100 billion. These figures underscore the scale and ambition of the initiative, as well as the importance of stable and committed partners.

Belgium’s €300 million pledge for Phase 2 is not insignificant, but it pales in comparison to the financial commitments of founding members. This has fueled perceptions that Belgium seeks to benefit from FCAS without sharing proportional risks, especially while investing heavily in a competing American system.

Defense Minister Theo Francken has defended Belgium’s position, citing the country’s dual obligations to NATO and the EU. He dismissed Trappier’s comments as “arrogant,” and emphasized that Belgium remains committed to European defense, even if it makes pragmatic procurement choices.

Industry Reactions and Broader Implications

The fallout from Trappier’s comments has reignited debate over the coherence of European defense policy. Manufacturers note that FCAS has long struggled with internal disagreements, particularly between Dassault and Airbus over leadership roles and intellectual property rights. Belgium’s ambiguous stance adds another layer of complexity to an already fragile alliance.

Some experts argue that Belgium’s actions reflect a broader trend among smaller European nations, which prioritize immediate operational needs over long-term strategic autonomy. Others warn that such decisions risk undermining collaborative efforts and delaying critical projects like FCAS.

In parallel, the UK-led Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP), involving Italy and Japan, is emerging as a potential rival to FCAS. If FCAS continues to face delays and disputes, more countries could pivot towards GCAP or other alternatives, fragmenting the European defense landscape further.

Balancing NATO and EU Commitments

Belgium’s situation illustrates the challenge of balancing NATO obligations with EU defense ambitions. The alliance encourages members to meet a defense spending target of at least 2% of GDP, prompting many to invest in off-the-shelf solutions like the F-35. However, such decisions can clash with EU goals of fostering indigenous capabilities.

Francken has emphasized that Belgium’s F-35 acquisition is consistent with NATO standards and ensures operational readiness. Nevertheless, the optics of simultaneously seeking deeper FCAS involvement while expanding American procurement have drawn scrutiny.

Some EU policymakers argue for clearer guidelines on participation in joint defense programs, including procurement alignment. Without such coordination, initiatives like FCAS risk becoming politically and financially unsustainable.

Future of FCAS and European Defense Integration

The FCAS program remains a cornerstone of European defense integration, but its success hinges on unity and mutual trust. Belgium’s reconsideration of its role could prompt other nations to reassess their commitments, especially if industrial disputes and financial burdens persist.

To maintain momentum, FCAS leaders may need to establish more inclusive governance structures, accommodate diverse procurement histories, and prioritize transparency in workshare agreements. Otherwise, the project risks losing credibility and partners to alternative programs.

Ultimately, Belgium’s decision will serve as a litmus test for the viability of pan-European defense cooperation in an era of geopolitical uncertainty and fiscal pressure.

Conclusion

Belgium’s reconsideration of its FCAS role following criticism over its F-35 procurement reflects deep-rooted tensions in European defense policy. While the country seeks to balance NATO requirements with EU ambitions, its actions have reignited debates about loyalty, industrial fairness, and strategic coherence.

As FCAS moves into its next phase, the program’s leaders must address internal disputes and clarify participation criteria to avoid further fragmentation. Belgium’s final decision will not only shape its own defense trajectory but also signal the future direction of European military cooperation.

FAQ

Why is Belgium reconsidering its role in FCAS?
Belgium is reassessing its involvement due to criticism from Dassault Aviation’s CEO over its decision to buy more U.S.-made F-35 jets while participating in a European defense program.

What is the Future Combat Air System (FCAS)?
FCAS is a European defense initiative led by France, Germany, and Spain to develop a sixth-generation fighter jet and integrated combat systems by 2040.

How many F-35s has Belgium ordered?
Belgium has ordered a total of 45 F-35 fighter jets, 34 in 2018 and 11 more in 2025.

What are the financial implications of Belgium’s F-35 purchase?
The additional 11 F-35s cost approximately €1.67 billion, raising concerns about Belgium’s commitment to European defense programs.

Could Belgium leave the FCAS program?
While a full withdrawal is unlikely, Belgium is currently reviewing its level of participation in the project.

Sources

Reuters, Euractiv, Defense Post, Aviationa2z, National Interest, AInvest