BERLIN — Germany and France are expected to reach a political decision on the future of their troubled joint fighter jet project on Dec. 17, people familiar with the discussions told POLITICO. The date is emerging as the key moment to settle months of stalled negotiations over Europe’s effort to build a next-generation combat aircraft. The Future Combat Air System was launched in 2017 to replace the Rafale and Eurofighter Typhoon in the 2040s. Conceived as Europe’s most ambitious defense initiative, FCAS combines a sixth-generation fighter jet with accompanying unmanned drones and a shared “combat cloud” designed to link aircraft and sensors across different countries.  But years of industrial disputes — particularly between France’s Dassault Aviation and Germany’s Airbus — have repeatedly held back progress. Spain is also a member of the consortium but its participation has been much less problematic. The target timing would allow Chancellor Friedrich Merz and French President Emmanuel Macron to take part in that day’s EU–Western Balkans summit in Brussels with an aligned stance on FCAS. A German chancellery spokesperson declined to comment on the matter. The French Defense Ministry did not immediately respond to POLITICO’s request for comment. While no final decision has been taken, officials and industry figures say the working expectation is that the program is likely to continue in a scaled-down or reconfigured form. France also walked out of the Eurofighter project, quitting over disputes about design authority and operational requirements, and instead developed the Rafale. | Daniel Karmann/Getty Images According to people familiar with the matter, one option is that the program would continue as an overarching framework for shared technologies like the combat cloud and sensors. The most disputed element, the fighter jet, could end up splitting into separate national airframes, meaning each country would build its own version of the aircraft instead of sharing a single design. France would rather operate a 15-ton warplane, which is light enough to land on aircraft carriers, while Germany is more inclined toward a 18-ton aircraft aimed at air superiority.  France also walked out of the Eurofighter project, quitting over disputes about design authority and operational requirements, and instead developed the Rafale. Officials said the outcome could still shift ahead of Dec. 17. But the date is now widely viewed inside government and industry as the moment of political clarity after months of gridlock over workshare and design leadership.  Following talks last week between Macron and Merz in Berlin, German air force leaders drafted a “decision roadmap” including a “mid-December” deadline to strike a deal, Reuters reported first.

BERLIN — Germany’s Bundestag budget committee is planning to sign off on over €2.6 billion in new military programs, according to a confidential list seen by POLITICO. The approvals, set for next week, mark another broad procurement round as Berlin ramps up defense spending and reenergizes its arms industry. The 11-item package includes almost every capability area: drones, long-range missiles, soldier systems, logistics vehicles and critical radar upgrades.  For Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s government, it’s another step toward making the Bundeswehr a war-ready force while giving German manufacturers a steadier pipeline of long-term orders. Some of the biggest checks are being written for drones. MPs will clear about €68 million for Uranos KI, an AI-enabled reconnaissance network built in competing versions by Airbus Defence and Space and German defense-AI company Helsing. Another €86 million will keep the German Heron TP, operated by Airbus DS Airborne Solutions and based on Israel’s Heron TP, flying into the 2030s. Roughly €16 million will go to Aladin, a short-range reconnaissance drone developed by Munich-based start-up Quantum Systems. Air power also gets a significant boost. MPs are set to approve around €445 million for a new batch of Joint Strike Missiles, produced by Norway’s Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace and integrated for Germany’s incoming Lockheed Martin F-35A fleet. Separate contracts worth €37 million will replace obsolete radar components on Eurofighter jets.  NH90 naval helicopters, built by NHIndustries — a consortium of Airbus Helicopters, Leonardo and Fokker — will receive a parallel radar upgrade, as the model returned to headlines after Norway settled a long-running availability dispute with the manufacturer. At the soldier level, the Bundeswehr will move forward with close to €760 million for new G95 assault rifles from Heckler & Koch, nearly €490 million for laser-light modules supplied by Rheinmetall Soldier Electronics, and about €140 million for headset-based communications systems produced by Rheinmetall Electronics with major subcontractors 3M and CeoTronics. And in a sign of Berlin’s effort to rebuild military logistics at scale, MPs will approve roughly €380 million for off-road military trucks from Mercedes-Benz and around €175 million for heavy tank-transport trailers built by DOLL. These contracts directly feed Germany’s defense-industrial base as Berlin pushes industry to deliver at wartime speed.

BODØ, Norway — Half a mile inside a mountain in the north of Norway, the U.K. is preparing for war. The country’s military planners have travelled to Bodø, nestled between the sea and snow-capped peaks of the Arctic Circle, to rehearse what it would look like if Russia decided to unleash hostile activity on its doorstep.  The exercise is set a year after an imagined ceasefire in Ukraine. It asks leaders of Nordic and Baltic countries to calculate what they would do as they begin to track pro-Russia civil unrest inside a bordering country. Defense ministers and generals in attendance are supplied with newspaper reports about the incidents, patchy intelligence updates and social media posts and asked to decide the best course of action. The task is not purely hypothetical. An unexplained attack on a Baltic undersea cable last year, Russian drones and airplanes violating NATO airspace and an increase in Russian ships threatening British waters have called attention to the vulnerability of the so-called “high north.” In the wake of Russia’s 2014 invasion of Crimea, Britain put itself forward to lead a group of like-minded European countries in preparing for threats on their northern flank, founding the 10-nation Joint Expeditionary Force. The question now is whether this alliance can live up to its potential as the Russian threat morphs — and the U.S. continues to turn away from European security under Donald Trump. A CHANGING LANDSCAPE While the high north has long been an area of Russian strength, Moscow’s methods are diversifying in a way that demands answers from its neighbors. At the same time, melting Article ice is opening previously-impassable seas and triggering a new contest for access and minerals in the region — pulling in both China and the U.S.  British Defence Secretary John Healey, who took part in this week’s war-gaming exercise, spoke to POLITICO on the plane from Norway to France, where he held talks with the French defense minister. “These are the countries where Russian aggression is their everyday experience. They live next door to the presence of the Russian military,” Healey said. “We’re the nations that can best assess the risks, best respond to the threats, and best get NATO connected to take this more seriously.” Part of the idea behind JEF is that it can act swiftly while the NATO machine, which requires the agreement of 32 member states to act, takes much longer to whir into action. In the wake of Russia’s 2014 invasion of Crimea, Britain put itself forward to lead a group of like-minded European countries, founding the 10-nation Joint Expeditionary Force. | Fredrik Varfjell/AFP via Getty Images Northern allies also believe it is the right vehicle for adapting to rapidly developing weaponry and disruptive tactics which do not meet the threshold of traditional warfare, sometimes known as “gray zone” attacks. Speaking from the cosy surrounds of the Wood Hotel, which sits on a winding road above Bodø, Maj. Gen. Gjert Lage Dyndal of the Norwegian army was philosophical about the danger to his country. Russian aggression in the Arctic is nothing new, he said, and has more to do with the long-running nuclear standoff between the U.S. and Russia than Norway itself. Nonetheless, he acknowledged the importance of a coordinated response, particularly for dealing with hybrid warfare — “something that has been developing all over Europe over the last couple of years” — as he pointed to the 2022 sabotage of Nord Stream natural gas pipelines linking Russia and Germany, heightened drone activity and the disruption of shipping routes. UNDER-POWERED? In theory, then, the U.K. has helped forge an ideal alliance for protecting the high north as its boundaries are increasingly tested. Yet there is a suspicion among some observers that it is not operating at full strength at precisely the time it is needed most. Founded under the previous Conservative government, JEF was a particular source of pride for former PM Rishi Sunak — who made a point of meeting its leaders in Latvia after a gap of eight years — and then-Defence Secretary Ben Wallace. Grant Shapps, another Tory former defense secretary, is keen to talk up JEF as “Britain leading from the front, working with our closest allies to make Europe and the North Atlantic safer,” but he stressed: “We can’t afford to lose momentum.” The current Labour government has devoted enormous effort to shoring up its own record on defense. It’s focused to a large extent on offering solidarity and resources to Ukraine, including through the new U.K.-French-led outfit, dubbed the “coalition of the willing.” But Anthony Heron, deputy editor-in-chief of the Arctic Institute think tank, said: “Maritime and air assets dedicated to the high north are limited, and the Arctic’s growing strategic significance demands hard but clear choices about resource allocations.” Ed Arnold, senior research fellow for European security at the Royal United Services Institute, was more damning. He said that while JEF is “naturally placed to step up” it “has never really managed to articulate its purpose” and “needs to get its mojo back.”  He’s calling for a long-term strategy for the force which would give it the resources and the attention currently devoted to the Coalition of the Willing, which sprung up amid European nerves about Trump’s commitment to Ukraine. One Labour MP with a security background, granted anonymity to speak candidly like others quoted in this piece, said a key question mark remains over JEF’s authority to act. While it is “capable” of deploying “I don’t think it’s empowered to do so at present, not adequately,” they added. “This is crucial because both the COW [Coalition of the Willing] and JEF will be the front lines against Russia,” they warned. Defense officials gathered in Bodø agreed privately that the group will only grow in importance as the U.S. shifts its security priorities elsewhere, even if couched in the positive language of Europe “stepping up.” BREAKING THROUGH One ingredient for powering up allies’ presence in the high north is investment in more icebreaking capability: specialist ships which can plow through the polar sea. Russia is estimated to have 50 icebreakers — at least 13 of which can operate in the Arctic and seven of which are nuclear — while China has five that are suitable for the Arctic. NATO members Sweden and Finland have their own versions of these vessels — as do the U.S. and Canada, but Norway’s Dyndal said more are needed. “Russia is living in the Arctic,” he warned. “We see China stepping up and learning through more research and activity in the Arctic than we do. We need to step up on the European side, on the American side, to actually learn to live in the ice-covered polar sea.”  The U.K. has no imminent plans to acquire an icebreaker, but British officials stress that the country’s brings its own naval and aviation expertise to the table. One senior military figure said there was a risk Britain would miss out if it doesn’t persuade allies to buy other U.K.-produced cold-weather equipment as defense budgets boom. Addressing Britain’s wider commitment to the region, Healey was defiant. “The level of recognition and readiness to follow the U.K. by defense ministers [in Bodø] was really strong.” “You can judge us by the response to Russian threats,” he said, before remarking that plans for further military tabletop exercises are under way. Europe is trying to get serious about its own security — but it’s still a long way from figuring out how to win the game.

BERLIN — Friedrich Merz said the quiet part out loud back in May: Germany intends to build the Bundeswehr into “the strongest conventional army in Europe,” pledging to give it “all the financial resources it needs.” Five months later, the German chancellor aims to add the hardware to that ambition, according to new internal government documents seen by POLITICO.  The sprawling 39-page list lays out €377 billion in desired buys across land, air, sea, space and cyber. The document is a planning overview of arms purchases that will be spelled out in the German military’s 2026 budget, but many are longer-term purchases for which there is no clear time frame. Taken together, it’s a comprehensive roadmap for Germany’s long-overdue defense overhaul, anchored firmly in domestic industry. Politically, the timing tracks with Merz’s shift to a new financing model. Since the spring, Berlin has moved to carve out defense from Germany’s constitutional debt brake, allowing sustained multiyear spending beyond the nearly exhausted €100 billion special fund set up under former Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s tenure. Items on the list will eventually appear, in smaller tranches, when they’re mature enough for a parliamentary budget committee vote. All procurements valued over €25 million need the committee’s sign-off. HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS The documents show that the Bundeswehr wants to launch about 320 new weapons and equipment projects over the next year’s budget cycle. Of those, 178 have a listed contractor. The rest remain “still open,” showing that much of the Bundeswehr’s modernization plan is still on the drawing board. German companies dominate the identifiable tenders with around 160 projects, worth about €182 billion, tied to domestic firms.  Rheinmetall is by far the biggest winner. The Düsseldorf-based group and its affiliated ventures appear in 53 separate planning lines worth more than €88 billion. Around €32 billion would flow directly to Rheinmetall, while another €56 billion is linked to subsidiaries and joint ventures, such as the Puma and Boxer fighting vehicle programs run with KNDS. The document foresees a total of 687 Pumas, including 662 combat versions and 25 driver-training vehicles, to be delivered by 2035. Rheinmetall is by far the biggest winner. | Hannibal Hanschke/EPA In air defense, the Bundeswehr aims to procure 561 Skyranger 30 short-range turret systems for counter-drone and short-range protection — a program fully under Rheinmetall’s lead. Along with that come grenades and rifle rounds in the millions. Diehl Defence emerges as the Bundeswehr’s second major industrial anchor after Rheinmetall. The Bavarian missile manufacturer appears in 21 procurement lines worth €17.3 billion. The largest share comes from the IRIS-T family, which is set to form the backbone of Germany’s future air defense architecture. According to the document, the Bundeswehr aims to buy 14 complete IRIS-T SLM systems valued at €3.18 billion, 396 IRIS-T SLM missiles for about €694 million and another 300 IRIS-T LFK short-range missiles worth €300 million. Together, these lines alone amount to around €4.2 billion — making IRIS-T one of the most significant single air defense programs in the Bundeswehr’s planning. Drones are also gaining ground on the military wish list.  On the higher end, the Bundeswehr wants to expand its armed Heron TP fleet operated with Israel’s IAI, aiming to buy new munitions for around €100 million. A dozen new LUNA NG tactical drones follow at about €1.6 billion. For the navy, four uMAWS maritime drones appear in the plan for an estimated €675 million, which will include replacement parts, training and maintenance. Several of the Bundeswehr’s most expensive new projects sit not on land, sea or in the air — but in orbit. The list includes more than €14 billion in satellite programs, calling for new geostationary communications satellites, upgraded ground control stations and, most ambitiously, a low-Earth-orbit satellite constellation worth €9.5 billion to ensure constant, jam-resistant connectivity for troops and command posts. The push aligns with Defense Minister Boris Pistorius’ €35 billion plan to boost Germany’s “space security.” KEEPING THE CASH AT HOME One of the most politically charged plans on the Bundeswehr’s wish list is the potential top-up of 15 F-35 jets from Lockheed Martin, worth about €2.5 billion under the U.S. Foreign Military Sales system.  These would keep Germany’s nuclear-sharing role intact but also retain its reliance on American maintenance, software and mission-data access. It could also signal a further German convergence on American weaponry it cannot replace, just as political tensions deepen over the Franco-German-Spanish sixth-generation fighter jet, the Future Combat Air System. The same U.S. framework appears across other high-profile projects.  The Bundeswehr plans to buy 400 Tomahawk Block Vb cruise missiles for roughly €1.15 billion, along with three Lockheed Martin Typhon launchers valued at €220 million — a combination that would give Germany a 2,000-kilometer strike reach.  The navy’s interim maritime-patrol aircraft plan, worth €1.8 billion for four Boeing P-8A Poseidons, also sits within the foreign military sales pipeline. One of the most politically charged plans on the Bundeswehr’s wish list is the potential top-up of 15 F-35 jets from Lockheed Martin. | Kevin Carter/Getty Images All three tie Berlin’s future strike and surveillance capabilities to U.S. export and sustainment control. Together, about 25 foreign-linked projects worth roughly €14 billion appear clearly in the Bundeswehr’s internal planning — less than 5 percent of the total €377 billion in requested spending.  Yet they account for nearly all of Germany’s strategic, nuclear-related and long-range capabilities, from nuclear-certified aircraft to deep-strike and maritime surveillance systems. By contrast, nearly half of the list is anchored in German industry, spanning armored vehicles, sensors and ammunition lines. In financial terms, domestic firms dominate; politically, however, the few foreign systems define the country’s most sensitive military roles.

Belgium’s defense ministry is investigating after 15 drones were spotted Thursday night over the Elsenborn military base near the German border, according to local media reports. The ministry told POLITICO on Friday it was still probing the incident. It’s currently not clear where the drones came from or who operated them, but reports said they flew into Germany after buzzing the base. The Belgian sighting comes amid a wave of drone-related disruptions plaguing Europe’s airspace. On Thursday evening, a separate incident over Munich Airport forced air traffic control to suspend operations, leading to the cancellation of 17 flights and affecting nearly 3,000 passengers. “Munich Airport, in cooperation with the airlines, immediately took care of passenger care in the terminals. Camp beds were set up, blankets, drinks and snacks were handed out,” Munich Airport said in a statement Friday. Airport officials added that 15 incoming flights were diverted to Stuttgart, Nuremberg, Vienna and Frankfurt. In recent weeks, airports in Denmark and Norway have also suspended operations after drones were spotted in their airspace, fueling debate among European leaders over the feasibility of a “drone wall” on the eastern flank to guard against Russian belligerence. In the most serious incident, nearly two dozen Russian attack drones crossed into Poland sparking a multimillion-euro emergency response from allied weapons systems. Ferdinand Knapp contributed to this report.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Drohnen über dem Nord-Ostsee-Kanal, über Kiel und auch über Mecklenburg-Vorpommern: Ausgespäht wurden mutmaßlich eine Marinewerft, ein Kraftwerk, Gebäude der Landesregierung von Schleswig-Holstein und weitere kritische Infrastruktur. Land und Bund haben den Vorgang tagelang unter der Decke gehalten. Matthias Gebauer vom SPIEGEL erklärt im Gespräch mit Rixa Fürsen, was genau vorgefallen ist – und warum Land und Bund selbst überrascht waren, dass es Tage gedauert hat, bis die Ereignisse öffentlich wurden. Außerdem geht es um die Reaktionen auf das Eindringen und die Mutmaßungen, welche Daten die Drohnen gesammelt haben könnten. Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren. Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: @gordon.repinski | X: @GordonRepinski.

PARIS — France is able to manufacture a next-generation fighter jet alone if no agreement can be found with Germany about the Future Combat Air System (FCAS), a French official told a small group of reporters on Wednesday. “If we fail to reach an agreement on FCAS, there is no need to worry about the fact that France has already built, knows how to build, and will build a fighter jet alone,” said the official, who was granted anonymity because of the sensitivity of the topic. “Alone does not mean only in France, we could involve a European ecosystem of subcontractors.” The French official’s comments come as tensions rise between Paris and Berlin — and imply France will not stay in the program at all costs. POLITICO reported last week that Germany is now looking at Sweden and even the U.K. to replace France in case Paris and Berlin can’t reach a deal by the end of the year. On Tuesday, France’s Dassault Aviation and Germany’s Airbus Defence and Space both said they could make the next-generation fighter jet happen without each other. While Dassault Aviation does have the technical skills to manufacture a warplane, it’s unclear whether France’s public coffers are deep enough to finance it without European partners. FCAS was launched in 2017 by France and Germany, with Spain joining the program later. It is designed to replace France’s Rafale and the Eurofighter Typhoon by 2040. The 2040 deadline is “non negotiable,” the French official said. “I’m not against the project, but when Germany says it’s going to exclude France, doesn’t that bother you? … Unfortunately, today, if you don’t create a hard power dynamic, you don’t get results,” Éric Trappier told them. | Thibaud Moritz/AFP via Getty Images French President Emmanuel Macron could travel to Germany in early October, while defense ministers from Germany, France and Spain will meet in October specifically to discuss FCAS. Complicating matters is that no replacement has been appointed yet for Sébastien Lecornu, who was shifted from being armed forces minister to prime minister earlier this month. He’s seen in Berlin as someone who can bring Dassault to the table. The main issue is that Dassault Aviation wants more decision-making power to develop the new aircraft, known as the New Generation Fighter (NGF), arguing that the current management structure is likely to cause delays.  Dassault CEO Éric Trappier conveyed that message again to French lawmakers on Wednesday. “I’m not against the project, but when Germany says it’s going to exclude France, doesn’t that bother you? … Unfortunately, today, if you don’t create a hard power dynamic, you don’t get results,” he told them. Paris has long insisted no delays would be acceptable — among other things because the next-generation fighter jet will be part of France’s nuclear deterrent — and has also previously cast doubt on whether the current organizational structure could guarantee the project will be delivered on time. Seemingly backing Dassault’s request, the French official told reporters that “if we put the cursor a little more on the NGF pillar and increase the French share a little, [there could be] other effects in compensation on other pillars, these are options to explore.” In other words, that other aspects of the program could be shifted to favor other partners. Another issue is the aircraft’s weight: France would rather operate a 15-ton warplane, which is light enough to land on aircraft carriers, while Germany is more inclined toward a 18-ton aircraft aimed at air superiority. The French official argued that a heavier airplane would require a more powerful engine, and that could lead to delays. “If we express divergent needs with Germany or Spain, we cannot afford to be months behind schedule. If the needs are divergent, we must say so,” the official said.

BERLIN — Sweden will not decide whether to join Europe’s next-generation jet fighter effort until the end of the decade, its defense chief told POLITICO. That comes as Germany mulls turning to Sweden, or even the U.K., as a potential fallback partner if talks between Paris and Berlin over the embattled Future Combat Air System fail by the end of the year. Defense Minister Pål Jonson, who was visiting Berlin, said Stockholm would make a decision on its future fighter path “somewhere between 2028 and 2030,” while stressing that the country’s new Gripen E aircraft, built by Saab, will remain in service “at least up to 2050.” “We are investing heavily into maintaining the freedom of choice to keep our design capacity, which I think is unique,” Jonson said. “There’s no other country of 10 million with the ability to design fighter aircraft — and that’s important for us to preserve.” The remarks come just days after POLITICO reported that Germany is frustrated with French company Dassault’s desire to have more control over FCAS, a project that includes Germany, France and Spain. Berlin wants clarity by the end of the year on how the €100 billion project can advance to its next phase. Both Jonson and his German counterpart, Boris Pistorius, denied that FCAS was a matter of talks during his Tuesday visit to Berlin’s defense ministry.  Asked whether his country would be open to joining the jet program, Jonson emphasized that collaboration was “in our DNA.” But he made clear that Stockholm will not give up sovereign design capacity: “Maintaining our design capabilities is very, very important for us, because we can tailor according to our operational needs.” NO GO ON DEFENSE BONDS Jonson also confirmed Sweden plans to accelerate its military buildup, aiming to reach NATO’s new defense spending targets — 3.5 percent of GDP on core defense plus 1.5 percent on related investments — sooner than most other alliance members. “Sweden aims to reach this not by 2035, but by 2030,” he said. On the EU front, Jonson drew sharp red lines. He said Sweden would not support issuing joint EU defense bonds — an idea pushed by Paris — and would vote them down if they reached the Council. “We don’t adhere to that idea,” he said. “We think this should be a national responsibility.” Pål Jonson also confirmed Sweden plans to accelerate its military buildup, aiming to reach NATO’s new defense spending targets. | Narciso Contreras/Getty Images He also rejected a bigger role for the European Commission in procurement. “We’re not part of SAFE,” he said, referring to the EU’s new €150 billion Security Action for Europe financing tool. He added that Stockholm prefers defense buys to be steered through the NATO Support and Procurement Agency, the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation or the European Defence Agency. “I don’t see a role for the Commission in doing joint procurement. EDA should have this role.” Jonson also issued a pointed message to European allies lagging on aid for Kyiv. “Not all countries are putting their money where their mouth is when it comes to Ukraine support,” he said. “That bothers me.” Jonson noted that the burden is being shouldered mainly by the Nordics, Baltics, Germany and the Netherlands. Sweden is now the fifth-largest donor worldwide, a position he said he would rather not hold. “I’d prefer Sweden to be at the bottom, not the top,” Jonson said. Although Jonson did not mention specific laggards, Southern European countries like Italy and Spain, as well as France, generally give a much lower share of their GDP as aid to Ukraine. Speaking of the relationship with the United States, Jonson said Europe must brace for a gradual U.S. drawdown of forces in Europe as Washington focuses more on the Indo-Pacific, even as it reaffirms its NATO Article 5 common defense commitment. “Europeans have to shoulder a larger responsibility for conventional deterrence,” he said, identifying space assets, long-range strike and airlift as the areas that will take the longest to build up.

Russia’s repeated violations of NATO airspace in the past few weeks are raising a difficult question for the alliance: Whether to respond by shooting down Russian aircraft. On Friday, three Russian MiG-31s violated Estonian airspace for 12 minutes before being intercepted by NATO fighter jets, including Italian F-35s participating in the alliance’s enhanced Baltic air policing mission. Earlier this month, Russian drones entered Poland’s territory and at least three were shot down after Polish F-16s and Dutch F-35s responded. “Russia should be in no doubt: NATO and allies will employ, in accordance with international law, all necessary military and non-military tools to defend ourselves,” NATO ambassadors said in a statement released on Tuesday. Moscow insists it’s done nothing wrong. Several NATO countries including Poland and Sweden are now warning they’re ready to shoot down Russian aircraft entering their airspace. But according to Charly Salonius-Pasternak, CEO of the Helsinki-based Nordic West Office think tank, there is a fundamental difference between Moscow and NATO. “Russia has said they think they’re in a military conflict with us and the West. We do not see it that way and because of that, our rules of engagement are different,” he said. Here’s what you need to know about NATO’s response so far. 1. WHAT ARE NATO’S RULES OF ENGAGEMENT? The alliance’s rules of engagement are classified. They define “the parameters for what the military can do within any given situation, that means that they are very different depending on the mission or the operation,” explained Oana Lungescu, a former NATO spokesperson who is currently a distinguished fellow with the Royal United Services Institute think tank in London. Rules of engagement must be in line with the alliance’s political guidance, she added. “For NATO, the main political guidance is that it’s a defensive alliance, whose aim is to deter aggression and prevent any conflict, and should that fail, to defend against it and defeat it.” They are approved by the North Atlantic Council (NAC), which gathers all NATO allies. They are implemented by the Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), currently Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, a U.S. Air Force general who also commands U.S. forces in Europe. Like every political decision within the alliance, rules of engagement require consensus. 2. WHAT ABOUT NATIONAL ARMED FORCES? NATO rules of engagement do not prevent national armed forces from making their own decisions on their soil when they are under national command. On Tuesday, Lithuania adopted new rules allowing its military to react to airspace violations “earlier and faster.” Romania, whose airspace was violated multiple times by Russian drones in the past months, on Thursday convenes its Supreme Defense Council to define the rules of engagement in case of more incursions by drones or manned aircraft. “We are ready for any decision aimed at destroying objects that may threaten us, such as Russian fighter jets,” Donald Tusk said during a press conference, while adding that some kind of consensus must also be reached among NATO allies. | Mateusz Slodkowski/Getty Images However, there can be risks if a country’s unilateral action leads to escalation, as Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk hinted on Monday. “We are ready for any decision aimed at destroying objects that may threaten us, such as Russian fighter jets,” he said during a press conference, while adding that some kind of consensus must also be reached among NATO allies. “I must be 100 percent certain … that all our allies will treat this in exactly the same way as we do. I must be 100 percent certain that when the conflict enters such an acute phase, we will not be alone in this,” the Polish prime minister continued. “We need to think twice before deciding on actions that could trigger a very acute phase of the conflict.” But that scenario would not have applied to Friday’s situation over Estonia because Baltic states do not have their own fighter jet fleets and rely on NATO’s air policing missions. According to a former NATO official, it’s precisely because Estonia doesn’t have its own warplanes that Russia violated the country’s airspace: “If the intrusion had taken place over Finland, the Finns could have decided to take it out. In the Baltic airspace, we are obliged to go up the NATO chain of command.” 3. WHY DIDN’T NATO SHOOT DOWN THE RUSSIAN FIGHTER JETS? There are several reasons — both political and military — why NATO’s warplanes didn’t take down the Russian MiG-31s last week. “Decisions on whether to engage in shooting aircraft … are always based on available intelligence regarding the threat posed by the aircraft,” NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said Tuesday, arguing that “no immediate threat” was detected in Estonia. He echoed Estonia’s Prime Minister Kristen Michal, who said “there are certainly various parameters for the use of force,” hinting that Friday’s incident didn’t call for it despite its obvious intentional nature. NATO’s response was in line with procedure, Estonia’s former air force chief Jaak Tarien told local media, adding that force is not immediately used during peacetime, under the assumption the incursions could be a mistake. According to Mykola Bielieskov, a Ukrainian military analyst and research fellow at Ukraine’s National Institute of Strategic Studies, both the risk of escalation as well as uncertainty about Donald Trump’s stance played a role in how NATO reacted. “Conditionally, no one will start World War III because of this,” he said. European countries “think that NATO is restrained by the fact that there is no certainty about the reaction and position of the U.S. under the Trump administration.” 4. ARE NATO COUNTRIES LOOKING TO CHANGE THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT? It’s unclear whether the current rules of engagement allow NATO fighters to shoot down Russian warplanes — and if so, under what circumstances. Inside the alliance, the general sense is that NATO’s defensive capabilities are up to the job. The alliance’s rules of engagement are classified. | Horacio Villalobos Corbis/Getty Images “There’ll be lots of debates” after Estonia, said one NATO diplomat, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly, “but there was no sense we were behind the curve.” There is an ongoing debate as to whether the rules for NATO’s air policing missions should be tightened. “Discussions will continue in NATO on appropriate measures and responses. It is important that Russia changes behavior,” said a senior NATO diplomat. Top officials in Estonia, Lithuania and the Czech Republic are calling for a more forceful response the next time Russia tests NATO, namely taking down Moscow’s warplanes. “We must respond appropriately, including possibly shooting down Russian aircraft,” said Czech President Petr Pavel. Speaking on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday, the U.S. president was asked if he believed NATO countries could shoot down intruding Russian aircraft. “Yes, I do,” he responded. “Roger that,” responded Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski. 5. HOW COULD NATO CHANGE THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT? In most cases, changing the rules of engagement would have to go through the NAC, where NATO allies would make a consensus-based decision relying on military advice and discussions with SACEUR Grynkewich. Since the full-scale war in Ukraine started, however, SACEUR has more authority to make adjustments without going through the NAC — such as sending more ships or planes to a given area. “NATO’s defense plans were activated on Feb. 24, 2022. Those plans … continue to be adjusted, that also gives SACEUR significant authority over how he uses assets and forces,” said Lungescu, the former NATO spokesperson. 6. WHAT HAPPENED THE LAST TIME A NATO COUNTRY SHOT DOWN A RUSSIAN AIRCRAFT?  In 2015, Turkey shot down a Russian Sukhoi-24M near the Turkish-Syrian border after a 17-second airspace violation and following several warnings. Crucially, however, that wasn’t part of a NATO mission — unlike Friday’s incident — but rather under national authority. “They had their own air force and took the decision nationally and only informed allies (in detail) afterwards. It proved to be highly effective,” the senior NATO diplomat mentioned above said. Ankara triggered NATO’s Article 4 and played the warning audio to the NAC, which then issued a statement. After that, the military alliance helped Turkey monitor its airspace with more AWACS early warning aircraft. According to Estonia’s Tarien, the incident had consequences: Moscow imposed trade sanctions on Ankara, and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan ultimately apologized. However, Russian planes stopped flying through Turkish airspace. Veronika Melkozerova and Jan Cienski contributed to this report. This article has been updated.

PARIS — Tensions between Paris and Berlin over the fate of a next-generation fighter jet are rising, with Dassault CEO Éric Trappier insisting on Tuesday that his company can manufacture a futuristic warplane alone. POLITICO has reported that Germany is looking for other partners if talks with France fail on the Future Combat Air System (FCAS), to which Trappier said: “If they want to do it on their own, let them do it on their own,” according to Agence France-Presse. “Could we make a sixth-generation aircraft on our own? The answer is yes. We could design it, build it, fly it and produce it,” he added, speaking on the sidelines of a Dassault factory opening in the suburbs of Paris. FCAS was launched in 2017 by France and Germany, with Spain joining the program later. It is designed to replace the Rafale and Eurofighter Typhoon by 2040. POLITICO reported last week that Germany is now looking at Sweden and the U.K. to replace France in case Paris and Berlin can’t reach an agreement by the end of the year. Dassault Aviation and Airbus — the company representing Germany in the project — have been fighting over how much work each company gets to do. The French Rafale-maker wants more decision-making power to develop the new aircraft, arguing that the current management structure is likely to cause delays.  Over the weekend the French armed forces ministry tried to strike a reassuring tone, insisting it remains fully committed to finding common ground with Germany on FCAS. But Thomas Pretzl, head of the workers’ council at Airbus Defence and Space, said Germany has the capability to develop the new fighter on its own or with partners other than France. “I believe that FCAS should go ahead without Dassault. There are more attractive and suitable partners in Europe,” he told Germany’s Handelsblatt newspaper. Chris Lunday contributed reporting from Berlin.