Europe's Race to Replace US Defense Enablers: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Europe is racing to develop critical defense capabilities to reduce its reliance on U.S. support, with key areas like air and missile defense, long-range strike systems, and command and control requiring years of investment and coordination. Experts predict full operational readiness could take up to a decade.

Europe is expected to need until the early 2030s to fully develop critical defense enablers that would allow it to deter or confront Russia independently of U.S. support, according to recent assessments from security analysts and researchers surveyed by Defense News. Experts indicate that establishing comprehensive air and missile defense systems, a top priority for NATO and the European Union, could require between five and ten years to reach full operational capability.

Current Capabilities and Shortcomings

European nations are relatively well-equipped in areas such as strategic airlift and aerial refueling, where existing assets meet or can soon meet operational requirements. However, other essential capabilities remain limited. The U.S., via NATO, continues to supply high-end combat resources, including command and control (C2), satellite intelligence, and deep strike options, which are either unavailable or only partially developed in Europe. Franois Heisbourg, special adviser at the Paris-based Foundation for Strategic Research, categorizes European capabilities into three groups: those with no meaningful capacity, those adequate today but requiring replacement, and those of sufficient quality but insufficient scale.

Beyond transport and tanker aircraft, areas nearing self-sufficiency include military satellite communications, battlefield C2, unmanned intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR), and long-range strike. Experts generally predict these capabilities could become fully operational within five years.

Significance of Offensive Capabilities

With concerns that Russia could test NATO's resolve in the coming years, analysts emphasize the necessity of long-range and deep strike systems for effective deterrence. Dutch intelligence warns that, following the Ukraine conflict, Russia could gather forces sufficient for limited military actions within a year, aimed primarily at influencing European security structures rather than defeating NATO outright. Estonia's Foreign Intelligence Service currently assesses that Russia has no plans to attack a NATO member in the next year. Guntram Wolff, senior fellow at the Brussels-based think tank Bruegel, highlights the limitations of purely defensive measures, noting that effective deterrence requires offensive capabilities, particularly deep strike systems. Denmark and Norway share this perspective, with Denmark advocating for long-range strike improvements and Norway acquiring Hanwha Chunmoo rocket artillery with munitions reaching up to 500 kilometers.

Progress on Long-Range Strike

Several European states, including France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, are pursuing projects under the European Long-range Strike Approach (ELSA). Some initiatives, such as air-launched strike systems, are reportedly advanced. In May of last year, the UK and Germany announced a collaborative effort to develop a system exceeding 2,000 km in range. Chris Kremidas-Courtney, senior visiting fellow at the Brussels-based European Policy Center and NATO advisor, underscores the gap, stating Europe lacks systems capable of exceeding 500 kilometers. Central Moscow lies approximately 585 kilometers from eastern Latvia, indicating the current limitations of deterrence without deep strike systems. Europe has the technical ability to produce intermediate-range ballistic missiles, with French company ArianeGroup identified as a capable manufacturer, though the financial costs would be significant.

Timelines and Implementation Challenges

Surveyed analysts express cautious optimism regarding European long-range strike development, with projections ranging from under two years to five years to reach adequate capacity. Conversely, achieving space-based ISR and fully integrated air and missile defense may require longer, with over half of respondents estimating readiness would take more than five years. Hlose Fayet, research fellow at the French Institute of International Relations, emphasizes the difficulty of establishing comprehensive strategic air and missile defense across Europe. Dependency on U.S. assets, such as Aegis Ashore, continues to influence European planning. While new systems like the French-Italian SAMP/T and additional Patriot batteries are being deployed, they reinforce reliance on U.S. support.

Air Defense Investments

Europe has been increasing investment in air defense. Since 2022, European countries have ordered approximately $18 billion in short- and very-short-range air defense systems, compared to $7.5 billion over the previous four years. Within two years, Europe is expected to counter cruise missiles and Russian hypersonic Kinzhal missiles effectively, though ballistic missile threats such as the Oreshnik remain more challenging.

Space-Based ISR Expansion

Following the U.S. suspension of intelligence sharing with Ukraine in March 2025, European nations accelerated development of proprietary space-based capabilities. Countries including Poland, Portugal, the Netherlands, Finland, Germany, and France announced plans for satellite-based intelligence acquisition, focusing on radar systems in space. Experts note that Europe must also ensure sufficient trained personnel to analyze and exploit these intelligence datasets effectively.

Command and Control

Battlefield C2 continues to be a critical area where Europe depends on U.S. support. Effective coordination and monitoring of forces would be challenging without American involvement. Analysts suggest that integrating French and German systems could eventually enable European land warfare operations, although initial implementation would be difficult. Airborne C2 is mixed, with NATO's 14 E-3A AWACS aircraft and Saab GlobalEye deliveries enhancing situational awareness, but full operational capability could take more than five years. The suppression and destruction of enemy air defenses (SEAD/DEAD) may require over a decade in some assessments.

Survey of Critical Defense Enablers

• Satellite communications: Europe operates significantly fewer military satellites than the U.S., with the UK having six and France five compared to the U.S.'s 108.
• Space-based ISR: European ISR and signals intelligence satellites increased from 14 in 2015 to 36 in 2025.
• Battlefield C2: Development depends on adaptation to potential U.S. withdrawal.
• Airborne C2: NATO AWACS and GlobalEye improve operational awareness.
• Aerial reconnaissance/Unmanned ISR: Capabilities can be fully operational within two to three years.
• Integrated air and missile defense: Limited, with progress in low-altitude systems and directed energy technologies.
• SEAD/DEAD: Full capability may take more than ten years.
• Long-range strike: Systems of 500–1,000 km could be operational in two years, but large-scale deployment remains insufficient.
• Aerial refueling: Europe has 38 Airbus A330 MRTTs with six additional units on order.
• Strategic airlift: Europe operates 131 Airbus A400M aircraft with 39 more planned.

Conclusion

Europe faces a long-term challenge in achieving defense independence from the United States. While progress has been made in strategic airlift, aerial refueling, and certain ISR areas, full self-sufficiency in deterrence and operational capability—particularly in air and missile defense, long-range strike, and command and control systems—remains several years away. Achieving these capabilities will require substantial investment in technology, personnel, and coordination across European nations.

Sources:

• Inside Europe’s Race to Supplant US Defense Enablers - Defense News
• EU Must Replace US Strategic Enablers to Strengthen Defense
• Kubilius Urges EU Defence Ramp‑Up to Replace U.S. Enablers
• The good, the bad and the ugly — Inside Europe’s race to supplant US defense enablers