Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Ravi Nayyar (ravirockks@infosec.exchange)'s status on Monday, 24-Mar-2025 09:31:37 JST Ravi Nayyar

   Great analysis by Perun of how Europe can/can't rearm, including in the context of the materiel relationship with the Yanks.

   Some bits that stuck out for me:
   - The importance of EU countries reforming their security clearances regime to enable skilled personnel to get to work quicker;
   - The need for a grand bargain between the EU countries and DIB firms (like the WWII one in America) to (re)shape corporate incentives in line with the EU's interest in rearmament;
   - The importance of EU states not going after blingy platforms such that they neglect the basics that sustain units (eg uniforms, logistics platforms);
   - The EU's push for DIB indigenisation being an industrial strategy problem - if it wants to decouple materiel'ly from the US, no point buying tons of stuff subject to the US FDPR.
   https://youtu.be/I0AOusajGsU

   • Embed this notice
     Ravi Nayyar (ravirockks@infosec.exchange)'s status on Monday, 24-Mar-2025 09:31:37 JST Ravi Nayyar

     in reply to

     'Yet a debate is now under way on repealing the [French] change [to the retirement age], under pressure from unions and the opposition — even as ministers discuss targets for raising the defence budget that would dwarf the pension savings.

     'Italy, for example, has seen its public debt to GDP rise from 31 per cent in the 1960s to 137 per cent in 2024, according to European Commission data.

     'France and the UK also have public debt exceeding the size of the economy, along with large budget deficits. The EU now spends about 2 per cent of GDP on interest payments. Italy’s figure is double that'.

     If the Europeans spend the lion's share of forecast materiel bonanza on _their own_ DIBs, that would have massive local multiplier effects in light of the number of industries a DIB plugs into.
     https://archive.md/mKpze