Actually the infantry batallion and support vessel is far more useful. Except F-35 procurement means infantry batallion and support vessel become history.
NATO gets a lot more value out of Navy ships for anti-piracy work and humanitarian relief as well as boots on the ground in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.
Look how the planes are going to be used. Most likely they will never be used in a high intensity conflict. For medium and low intensity conflict, 4.5th generation is fine.
And if current NATO anti-interventionism becomes long term, then any combat jets become less useful. You keep them around in case of WWIII.
And remember prior to 1994, NATO jets seldom deployed anywhere.
Which is why F-35 or even Eurofighter/Rafale might not be the right choice especially if it means gutting overall capability.
It could be a better option for someone like Denmark is:
1. Agreement with Germany or Norway to patrol airspace.
2. Denmark to provide some crews/maintainers to joint fighter squadron
3. Denmark to invest in additional special operations or naval vessels or light infantry.
4. Denmark could also invest in Joint NATO capabilities such as NATO Strategic Transport unit or Training or EW or whatever.
Same applies to other small forces.
Honestly I would buy F35 and Transport aircraft and let the rest go except for some infantry and a small coast guard. F35 is so you can play with bigger countries in a offensive role, transport aircraft so you will always have a low risk function on joint operations where you want to avoid being involved in shooting but at same time providing a valuable asset. Infantry because you will always need a army. Maybe a medium range AA and ABM system for potential home air and missile defense. What ever is left after that throw at the navy.
I simply don’t buy the argument that small countries cant afford a 40-50 sized force of 100 million dollar/euro fighters.
Sign In
