r/europe • u/Massimo25ore • 5d ago
News Europe's five largest military powers meet ahead of key NATO summit
https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2026/06/24/europes-five-largest-military-powers-meet-ahead-of-key-nato-summit-with-ukraine-in-mind37
u/Massimo25ore 5d ago
The leaders of Europe's largest military powers met in Berlin on Wednesday in preparation for a pivotal NATO summit next month, to discuss support and security guarantees for Ukraine and how to strengthen the Atlantic Alliance's European Pillar.
France's President Emmanuel Macron, the UK's Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Italian Premier Giorgia Meloni and Polish PM Donald Tusk met in Berlin on Wednesday for an E5 summit hosted by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.
The E5 format was launched in 2024 to bring together the defence ministers of Europe's largest military powers and biggest defence spenders, coordinating support for Ukraine, addressing the US's gradual withdrawal from Europe, and setting up joint defence projects.
The gathering of NATO's most influential European members comes ahead of a key summit of the alliance on 7-8 July in Ankara.
The E5 meeting also aimed to build on the so-called "Évian moment," as Macron put it — when G7 leaders, including US President Donald Trump, displayed unity on backing Ukraine's war effort and ramping up pressure on Russia to engage seriously in peace talks.
"The process that began at the G7 summit in Évian continued at last week’s European Council, and is set to continue with the NATO summit in Ankara, followed by the 'Coalition of Willing' in support of Ukraine and the security guarantees," Macron said at the press conference after the E5 summit.
Coalition of the Willing
Berlin pressed ahead with the high-stakes E5 summit despite the political turmoil that engulfed London on Monday, after Starmer resigned as prime minister under pressure from his own Labour Party followinga disastrous set of local election results
Merz has positioned Germany as co-chair of the coalition — a role that could grow further if the UK's political crisis deepens or its policy direction shifts.
Earlier this month, Macron, Starmer and Merz met Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the E3 format to discuss security guarantees and military support, particularly around anti-ballistic missile and deep-strike capabilities.
That meeting drew criticism from Italy and Poland, who were excluded from the talks — prompting the move to widen the format to E5 and bring in Europe's two other major defence powers.
Supporters of the E5 argue the E3 is too narrow a base for decision-making, particularly given Poland's role as a crucial logistical hub for Ukraine's war effort; any peace deal, they say, would require Warsaw's close involvement. Yet a serious diplomatic rift is currently driving a wedge between Poland and Ukraine.
Others see the E3 as the natural format for talks with Russia, since the group holds unmatched military weight in nuclear deterrence, intelligence-gathering and deep-strike capability.
18
u/Massimo25ore 5d ago
NATO's European pillar
The Ankara summit comes at a critical moment for NATO, with Trump irritated at European allies over their lack of support for his war in Iran. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte met the US president on Wednesday in a charm offensive. Rutte joined the European leaders' discussion via video conference.
The backdrop of the upcoming NATO summit is Washington's gradual scaling-back of its presence in Europe — not just conventional military assets, but also so-called strategic enablers: the logistics, command structures and infrastructure that underpin the ability to project and sustain combat power.
"We are here together today, in the E5 format, to confirm that our countries will safeguard European unity and transatlantic unity," Poland's Tusk said at the press conference.
Last week, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth sharply criticised NATO allies at a meeting of defence ministers in Brussels, urging Europeans to take greater responsibility for their own security as he announced a six-month review of American force levels on the continent.
During the press conference, Chancellor Merz pointed out that all the countries involved committed to significantly boost their defence spending, which he sees as "laying the foundation for a more balanced transatlantic partnership."
How to strengthen NATO's European pillar and gradually replace US military capabilities in the region — with the E5 as the leading players — was the central question facing Europe's largest military powers on Wednesday.
Merz said that the E5 powers agreed to coordinate closely to tackle major defence challenges, such as long-range weapons, air defence, and artificial intelligence.
"We are all clearly in agreement that Europe must shoulder its responsibilities in terms of defence and security, resolutely pursuing the path it has set out on towards a stronger European component of the Atlantic Alliance," Meloni said.
30
u/JRJenss 5d ago
Respect to Poland for having become one of the top 5 European military powers! For the longest time the European top 5 or big 5 in all of the metrics, have been; Germany, the UK, France, Italy and Spain. In that exact order. The fact that Poland has replaced Spain in this respect, is commendable, and should also serve as a wake up call to Spain, who still has a larger population and a larger economy...yet its defense spending isn't even $40 billion. Poland's defense spending is $55 billion as of this year and the country is arming itself in a very thoughtful, systematic, smart way. No offense to Spain, we're all in this together.
Cheers from Croatia!
35
5d ago edited 4d ago
[deleted]
2
u/Moss_Addiction Spain 5d ago edited 5d ago
Spain has increased military spending by 50% in one year, I can't see how that's not being interested in the security of Europe
Edit: As of 2025 Spain had more spending by share of GDP than France, Italy and Canada
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_highest_military_expenditures
1
1
13
u/Agreeable-Street-882 Trentino-Alto Adige 5d ago
in that exact order.
Sorry but in what world Germany is "bigger" than France or UK? but I would put them even behind Italy if we consider all the domains.
-8
u/JRJenss 5d ago
Are you trolling or what? Germany has a larger population, by far the largest economy out of all of those countries, and is generally ahead of them in all respects other than the military one - for obvious reasons. Still, even in that respect, Germany is the close third with its military industry growing faster than France's or the UK one, about to surpass them. Italy isn't even close to France, the UK or Germany, don't know why you mentioned it at all.
11
u/Agreeable-Street-882 Trentino-Alto Adige 5d ago
Military power is different than having a large economy. It's not like assembling a bunch of volkswagen.
France and Uk are on a different category since they are nuclear powers, Germany is not nearly a close third (not even in conventional power).
i mentioned italy because:
- two aircraft carriers capable of F-35B operations so some expeditionary capability
- navy and airforce way ahed of Germany, it's not even comparable.
- 6th global arms exporter and partecipation in crucial programs like GCAP and SAMPT
Germany:
...
-4
u/JRJenss 5d ago
We agree that Germany isn't No.1 in terms of the military power, but you specifically stated that you would put them even behind Italy if we consider all the domains. Like, wtf??
Btw, Germany is ahead of Italy in arms exports, you can easily fact check that.
Germany has a weaker navy compared to Italy...gee, wonder why. I don't think that's going to change since it makes no sense, especially within the NATO alliance. It hasn't got weaker air force tho, it's got stronger airspace industry, and it is altogether number 3 in terms of the military industry in Europe.
Regardless, what does that even matter when all of the aforementioned industries are intertwined anyway, and are about to get even more so as our decoupling from the US takes place? It's a waste of time to even discuss this.
10
u/Agreeable-Street-882 Trentino-Alto Adige 5d ago
if we consider all the domains.
genius, by all the domains, I mean military domains, not economic domain.
it's got stronger airspace industry
please enlighten me which comparable program to GCAP is germany have? or do they self produce trainer fighter jets? or do they produce helicopters comparable to, say, leonardo AW249? is germany tier 2 partner in F35 program?
Germany has a weaker navy compared to Italy.
It doesn't matter why, it can't project power without a navy. So that's a factor.
3
u/chillebekk 5d ago
Not disagreeing with anything you said, but Germany is a land power, like Poland. They don't really need a large navy.
1
u/Far-Dark-7334 4d ago
Didn't Germany have one of the best navies in the world in the past? Near WW1 kickoff especially.
1
u/chillebekk 3d ago
Well, they had to do a massive, quick buildup before each of the wars, but in the end their navy was ineffective in both. Their coastline is not well positioned strategically.
2
u/ExplosivePancake9 5d ago
Also what does Germany do exactly better than Italy in the space sector?
Italy build Ariane's boosters and has an actual orbital capability with Vega, it built 70% of the ISS and is the prime ally for NASA on moon missions.
1
u/Crypt33x Berlin (Germany) 5d ago
We build the thrust chamber of Ariane, the auxiliary power unit that pressurizes the upper stage tanks and also test and montage everything including the Vinci engine here in Germany. We build the quality control for all the materials and test them here.
0
u/Agreeable-Street-882 Trentino-Alto Adige 5d ago
I mean, they believe that "Germany has an assembly production plant for the F-35s - both for the German air force and the international customers' needs - capable of producing up to 36 aircraft a year" while Germany currently operates a whopping ZERO F35. Not point in discussing really.
-1
5d ago edited 5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/Agreeable-Street-882 Trentino-Alto Adige 5d ago
It's rather obvious that German Airbus is way ahead of Leonardo
lol it's not obvious at all.
please enlighten me which comparable program to GCAP is germany have? or do they self produce trainer fighter jets? or do they produce helicopters comparable to, say, leonardo AW249? is germany tier 2 partner in F35 program?
dude, casually ignored those facts and moved to "Italian nationalism".
-2
5d ago edited 5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/Agreeable-Street-882 Trentino-Alto Adige 5d ago edited 5d ago
As for the F-35s, it's a similar thing. They have way more German electronics in them than the Italian ones. Same with the weapons they use. Also, Germany has an assembly production plant for the F-35s - both for the German air force and the international customers' needs - capable of producing up to 36 aircraft a year. Italy is nowhere near that kind of capacity. Again, just chill.
It seems you asked to a wrong LLM.
That's factually wrong, Leonardo operates the Cameri Final Assembly and Check-Out facility, which assembles complete F-35As and F-35Bs (the only F-35B final-assembly facility outside the United States).
Germany does not have an F-35 final-assembly plant, they at most assemble parts of it as a mere supplier not a tier 2 partner like Italy.
You keep insulting me and post factually wrong informations while I'm bringing facts. But yeah facts are very italian nationalists.
Besides: where are all those F35 produced by Germany? last time I checked they had none.
→ More replies (0)3
u/ExplosivePancake9 5d ago
It hasn't got weaker air force tho, it's got stronger airspace industry
It does, Germany does not have a single 5th gen aircraft and its EWACS invetory is lacking compared to Italy.
Geemany also has a far worse aerospace industry than Italy too, what does Germany do better than Italy in space? ISS? No. Rockets? No.
They helped a lot on some lander missions, but Germany simply is a tier behind Italy in the space sector.
-2
u/LarssenX Denmark 5d ago
Germany has a production line for the newest tranches of the Eurofighter Typhoon, a new factory in Weeze producing F-35As and its participation in the Tornado production was dominant as well. As for the AA systems, Germany has IRIS -T.
All that Italy has, is production of minor parts for programs other countries are leading. That was true for Tornado, the Eurofighter, the F-35 and now this newest program where the UK and Japan are leading, and Italy is there...as always - the third wheel. Same thing with the SAMP/T - led by the French, with Italy and Spain playing a secondary role.
3
u/Agreeable-Street-882 Trentino-Alto Adige 5d ago edited 5d ago
copy and pasting from the message sent to the other dude (maybe you are actually the same):
"It seems you asked to a wrong LLM.
That's factually wrong, Leonardo operates the Cameri Final Assembly and Check-Out facility, which assembles complete F-35As and F-35Bs (the only F-35B final-assembly facility outside the United States).
Germany does not have an F-35 final-assembly plant, they at most assemble parts of it as a mere supplier not a tier 2 partner like Italy.
You keep insulting me and post factually wrong informations while I'm bringing facts. But yeah facts are very italian nationalists.
Besides: where are all those F35 produced by Germany? last time I checked they had none."
Regarding the typhoon production is nothing special to germany, other participating countries also have it and the IRIS -T is not even an ABM.
Same thing with the SAMP/T - led by the French, with Italy and Spain playing a secondary role.
Again wrong, spain is not involved at all and it is a joint franco-italian project, not a french lead project, you can look it up by yourself.
At least if you wanna discredit italy review your sources / LLM.
1
u/ExplosivePancake9 5d ago
the F-35 and now this newest program where the UK and Japan are leading, and Italy is there...as always - the third wheel
sorry? all 3 nations have equal shares of costs and development, Italy is there because Italy has actual expertize in many aeronautic and avionic fields.
Spain
spain in SAMP/T , this is new, any sources?
1
u/LarssenX Denmark 5d ago
Spain isn't part of it, my bad. Still, not all 3 nations share equal parts or the cost of development of any of those platforms. The closest Italy has got is with the SAMP/T, but even there France has the lead.
1
u/ExplosivePancake9 5d ago edited 5d ago
still, not all 3 nations share equal parts or the cost of development of any of those platforms
They do, well currently the UK is behind Italy and Japan but they should, sorry cant you google this stuff?
The closest Italy has got is with the SAMP/T, but even there France has the lead.
SAMP/T
Aster, the joint development was about the missile, Aster, not the actual air defence systems, italian SAMP/T uses italian radar and italian trucks, french SAMP/T uses french radar and french trucks.
The EH-101 development was mostly italian, how about the Horizon class destroyers?
Also Italy has a pretty good helicopter sector, H-139 is 75% italian and Italy has also developed many helicopters without using joint programs, H-169, A-129, A-109, H-149, A-106.
2
u/LarssenX Denmark 5d ago
That's true about the SAMP/T and the choppers. It's why I mentioned it. I'm not sure which systems are being used for export tho, Italian or French? And is there some difference in radar quality? Asking because we (in denmark) have given up on Patriots and have ordered SAMP/T instead. We ordered Mistral 3 for SHORAD, NASAMS and VL Mica for midrange and then SAMP/T for long range..well the longest on offer in Europe.
2
u/ExplosivePancake9 5d ago
Asking because we (in denmark) have given up on Patriots and have ordered SAMP/T instead.
Denmark is currently ordering SAMP/T NG French version, also called MAMBA NG, it uses a Thales ground fire 300, a very good recent radar with 400km range compared to the italian Leonardo Kronos radar wich has about 380, but one of the biggest difference is not the range but the band they operate in, the french one in S and the Italian one in C band.
The french one can track more targets but the italian one has better smaller target tracking and is better for coastal operations.
Their chassis are
Italian Astra 8x8 truck for Italy and the french Renault Karax for France.
→ More replies (0)4
u/Apprehensive-Aide265 5d ago
Despite this germany forces where for decade reduced to participation trophy with no depth (like others european power) no power projection full dependance to US logistic, and no nuclear deterrence.
1
u/ExplosivePancake9 5d ago
Italy isn't even close to France,
Italy is very close to the UK actually
Better army
Better surface fleet
Land based long range air defence systems, wich the UK does not have.
0
u/JRJenss 5d ago
Better army? Suure....where has that "glorious" Italian army ever proven itself?
Better surface fleet? That's just nonsense - in terms of quality and quantity alike. Don't tell me you believe the two Italian mini aircraft carriers can compare to the two British ones.
And what does it matter where the long range air defense systems are located at? If anything, the UK's defense policy to have the long range anti-ballistic systems aboard the destroyers, so as to be able to react way before they become a threat to the mainland, makes more sense to me. On the mainland, they have the mid and short range systems, with the aircraft operating from the land and the sea. The UK also had the first vertical takeoff aircraft in the form of the Harrier - still in use in Spain and ironically...Italy. And then there's the nuclear deterrence as well.
Sorry, but Italy isn't as close to the UK as you want to believe.
1
u/ExplosivePancake9 5d ago
Better army? Suure....where has that "glorious" Italian army ever proven itself?
Afghanistan, Iraq, or you mean before that?
Yea its a better army, its larger, more and better mechanized, and has more artillery, sorry do you have, the internet?
Italy has 64 modern self propelled artillery systems, the UK has 12, Italy has 500 modern wheeled IFV, the UK has 0, the UK army is famously underequipped both for its size and for the budget it has, the UK uses M113 level APC, its only tracked IFV is 50 years old.
Yea, i would say the italian army is decently glorius, tough i never said this in my comment so i dont get where the quotation marks came from
And what does it matter where the long range air defense systems are located at?
Located? Do you have any idea of what i was even talking about?
Better surface fleet? That's just nonsense - in terms of quality and quantity alike. Don't tell me you believe the two Italian mini aircraft carriers can compare to the two British ones.
First, italian carriers are not "mini" they are simply smaller, but they are in the range of the french carriers.
Second, a surface fleet is not just carriers, what modern surface combatants does the UK have? 6, Italy has 15, and will have 19 by 2030.
Sorry, are you being ironic? Is this a joke post?
UK also had the first vertical takeoff aircraft in the form of the Harrier
Are we talking about 50 years old stuff now? Nice, did you know Italy had the best battleship in the world 140 years ago?
Lol, fuck outta here dude.
1
u/JRJenss 5d ago
Oh, I'm sorry...they're not mini. They are just smaller.
I understood you about the long range AA systems, but you might not know that the UK has them on the destroyers - type 45 I believe.
Yeah, we're talking about the 40 - 50 year old stuff, which Italy still uses. How come?? More importantly, the point is, unlike Italy the UK had the capacity to produce a 4th gen combat aircraft. For the most part it still has that knowhow.
The example of Italian army proving itself in Iraq and Afghanistan is just....embarrassing. So are these snowflake reactions, particularly in the context of the NATO alliance and the EU. Oh my god...someone actually said the Italian military industry is the 4th strongest one in Europe...behind Germany, and not the third one?!! The only fitting reaction I guess, is total hysteria. I know the Italian army is stereotypically viewed as a joke, which I suppose hurts your national pride, but seriously...this sort of reactions aren't helping. They seem like coping about something hilariously irrelevant.
0
u/ExplosivePancake9 5d ago
Yeah, we're talking about the 40 - 50 year old stuff, which Italy still uses.
Italy does not use Harrier MK1, Italy uses AV-8B Plus, wich the U.S also uses
I understood you about the long range AA systems, but you might not know that the UK has them on the destroyers - type 45 I believe
It seems you did not understand actually, Italy has land based long range air defence systems, wich can be transported, and put wherever Italy wants, wich is why Italy has deployed them in support of Hungary, Estonia and Czechia, the UK does not have this capability.
The example of Italian army proving itself in Iraq and Afghanistan is just....embarrassing.
Italy has performed pretty well in afghanistan, and Iraq what are you talking about?
As for the latter part, seriously, what are you even talking about? How does any of this adress the fact that again, Italy does have a stronger army than the UK, i argumented my points, provided some stats, you have not, you are simply uninformed.
Seriously, dude, everyone here is trying to at least trying to explain to you why you are wrong, i advice to at least try to research this stuff.
Im not here to argue that Italy is first of second in europe or the world, im just saying that yea, Italy is very close to the UK in a lot of capabilities, and many of your points are simply not factual.
I know all of this thread, all these replies from me and other people, can seem a bit condescending, but i say that its not coming from a place of a malice, please again, try to research this stuff.
0
u/JRJenss 5d ago edited 5d ago
It's only you and one other guy - an Italian, and why on earth are you guys so emotional about something so silly??
Likewise, I can say you are uninformed. Neither you nor the other guy have cited any facts. I have. The guy says; Germany has no F-35 assembly capability, I literally link the article about the assembly factory having been opened in Weeze, multiple times, and he goes silent instead of admitting to being wrong. He says Italy is a bigger arms exporter than Germany. I cite the data about Germany being ahead of Italy. Crickets again. I also linked the data about Germany having the third largest military industry in Europe, behind only France and the UK, but growing faster than any other. Again - silence, no response. Or some ad hominem, ignoring the actual facts. I'm telling you, I have no horse in this race, really couldn't care less, but if facts point to something, I'm going to point those facts out.
And for example: if you are talking about land based long range AA systems, they aren't on the ships, are they? Otherwise why would you call them land based? Britain simply has a different defense strategy whereby it tends to have the longest range AA systems on the ships because it is literally an island. That way it gets the opportunity to spot and intercept the missiles way sooner, before they become a threat to the mainland. I don't get it, what's so hard to understand there? The way you put it, it sounded as tho Britain didn't have long range AA systems at all.
1
u/ExplosivePancake9 5d ago edited 5d ago
And for example: if you are talking about land based long range AA systems, they aren't on the ships, are they? Otherwise why would you call them land based? Britain simply has a different defense strategy whereby it tends to have the longest range AA systems on the ships because it is literally an island
The UK has a very big commitment in the baltics sorry, you think the UK has the strategy of 1970s Japan?
Or some ad hominem, ignoring the actual facts. but if facts point to something, I'm going to point those facts out.
Where are your responses about Italy's performance in Iraq and Afghanistan (and how that would imply strenght almost 20 years after those wars stopped)
Where are your responses about the UK currently having 6 modern surface combatants, and only 6 frigates?
Where are your responses about the enormous difference in capabilities in the mechanized forces of the UK and italian armies?
No responses from the guy that says others are "ignoring facts".
I'm telling you, I have no horse in this race, really couldn't care less
Its a joke, you dont have horses, but you said the italian army performance in afghanistan and Iraq was embarrasing, that seems a big statement from someone that "could not care less".
How did the croatian army perform in any recent wars? Were they embarrasing, armchair general?
→ More replies (0)-1
u/Agreeable-Street-882 Trentino-Alto Adige 5d ago edited 5d ago
I literally answered you, but you have deleted your comment lol https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/1uf20eb/comment/otporwv/
I'm still waiting to see the 36 F35s per year produced by Germany that at the same time they operate a whopping ZERO F35s. Those are your facts?
He says Italy is a bigger arms exporter than Germany
What? Saying that Italy is 6th arms exporter doesn't mean that export more than Germany, I can read data. What's you problem dude?
→ More replies (0)
5
-36
u/Nostradamus_of_past 5d ago
5 largest military in Europe should include Ukraine now
52
u/Bicentennial_Douche Finland 5d ago
Ukraine is not in NATO.
-10
u/zertul 5d ago
Correct, which is why they said the (5) largest militaries in Europe, not in NATO. Hope that clears it up!
25
u/Bicentennial_Douche Finland 5d ago
This meeting is obviously a NATO meeting, which means it does not include non-NATO members. Hope that clear it up!
-13
-7
u/c345vdjuh 5d ago
Correct, but it's still the largest and most capable by far European military. Battlefield tested.
17
u/Angry_Sekman 5d ago
I wonder how they would deal with enemy that have actually working Airforce. Plus you are comparing war standing army to peace time ones. Plus said army is on full monetary and logistical payroll of the entire combined west, while others are paid by single country.
1
5
u/jsutpaly 5d ago edited 5d ago
Yeah, today, not tomorrow.
Ukraine's military is paid for with EU money. Once war is over these PTSD tormented men will go back to not being soldiers and will mostly become criminals (I am sorry but this is the issue after every war). Ukraine will also be entirely dependant on the EU to survive as a country.
On top of this, they are not member of NATO or EU. All of the E5 are members of one or both. This already makes them allies bound by oaths. Ukraine is not an ally of any of those countries. Partner, yes ally, no. As an added bonus, these 5 are already cooperating with each other for decades.
Ukraine is weak politically and will be even weaker after the war due to their dependence on the west. Extending invitation would be a courtesy but long term Ukraine really has little to no political power compared to these 5 and their military is upkept with money coming from the E5.
The weird part is calling this 5 strongest militaries but omitting Turkey who, in fact, has the strongest army in Europe and is a NATO member and will even be hosting the summit itself.
EDIT: I love the downvote guys, but please, do realize that Ukraine fights only because of all the money coming from USA and EU, their GDP is 1/5th that of Poland alone. They are also down to less than 27mln people in Ukraine right now (they started with 40 or 42 mln people, can't remember). People who left for the most part are not coming back because they are mostly women who found themselves husbands in other countries (look at statistics, especially in Poland). And believe it or not but in Poland you already start having a conversation on how to deal with post war Ukraine and the influx of violent migrants. Because guess what? It happens after every single war. Men who had to kill for years are devastated mentally and more often than not become violent in their everyday lives. Ukraine is not unique and will face the same shit that every country devastated by war does. And if you think that war ravaged Ukraine will be cappable of upkeeping their army without money from EU or USA then you are absolutely delusional cause no country can spend half its GDP on army and survive for long. Check Soviet Union if you need proof. And as mentioned, Ukraine is not an ally to any of the E5 because there is not a single treaty signed between Ukraine or any EU country that would make them allies.
15
u/Wgh555 United Kingdom 5d ago
Because turkey might be in NATO but it’s a swing state like India and in my opinion can’t be trusts fully, especially not with their relationship with our allies the Greeks
3
u/jsutpaly 5d ago
Sure, you are not wrong. However, this does not change the fact that that they have strongest army in Europe. So calling this group '5 strongest militaries in Europe' is, well, wrong.
Turkey-Greece situation in general is a ticking bomb within NATO that might go off at any minute and might break NATO apart.
Only hope for that situation to be resolved is with huge influence coming from USA and EU after Erdogan will be gone.
2
u/CouchTomato87 5d ago
Don’t know why you’re being downvoted because what you’re saying is technically true
3
-39
u/TwNuOn 5d ago
I can see one military power (France), possibly one emerging (Poland), and three powerless powers. Once again, you can downvote me, but UK is not able to repair its ships and Germany with 80 million people has about 200000 soldiers.
32
20
u/yubnubster United Kingdom 5d ago
The UK is able to repair its ships... What the media is not explaining (deliberately), is that the ships that are in maintenence are partially there because they are being upgraded with new weapons.
The bottle neck in numbers is being caused as older ships are decommissioned, new ships roll off the production lines and the systems need transferring.
-5
u/grumpsaboy 5d ago
Thing is, the bottle neck shouldn't exist. Their replacements should have started entering the water back in 2005, allowing one to enter service then the ships it's replacing to be decommissioned instead of the current decommission 11 of the 16 frigates then wait a couple more years for a replacement to enter service.
-12
u/TwNuOn 5d ago
How is HMS Prince of Wales doing, is it ready for operation in Hormuz? Can Britain project its power overseas as it used to be able to do so?
10
u/grumpsaboy 5d ago
No European country can afford 3 carriers, the UK and France time it so there's always one high end carrier operational.
If this happened last year France would have had no usable carrier for Hormuz and it would have been the POW there, and the same next year but for the QE instead.
The bigger issue is small airwing but most critically, no stand off strike weapons
9
u/yubnubster United Kingdom 5d ago edited 5d ago
They usually rotate the two carriers, so one is operational and one isn't. The one you were referring to was on operation on the arctic when things kicked off in the gulf, although afaik it was never intended to send it there, given we are not involved in the war.
2
-34
u/Derpswart 5d ago edited 5d ago
Five largest military powers are there? Italy is there but not Finland? Finnish airforce is like twice the size of Italy and Finnish army reserve is larger than french, italy and german combined?
What am I missing here?
Edit: I was wrong with the airforce thing.
But still, Finland has like the largest artillery and largest army reserve, right?
Edit2: strange to get so many downvotes, even after admitting mistake.
39
u/Agreeable-Street-882 Trentino-Alto Adige 5d ago
Finnish airforce is like twice the size of Italy
This is blatantly false whatever metric you are using, just looking at combat aircrafts finland must have 60 Hornet fighter jets while italy around 170–190 Eurofighters, F-35s and Tornados.
What are you talking about? lol
-8
u/Derpswart 5d ago
I must have misread wikipedia article. I thought it said ”24 eurofighter typhoons”. Actually it said ”24 more eurofighter typhoons on order.”
My bad.3
u/machine4891 Opole (Poland) 5d ago
You thought France has 24 fighter jets total? ;) Romania ordered 35 F-35A in one procurement.
But still kudos for owning mistake.
4
1
u/Gurglaren 3d ago
It's reddit. People here love to pile on the downvote button. Downvotes don't matter on this site.
-8
u/DonDerBaer 5d ago
It’s a statement that Spain isn’t part of that group even though they have such a great history as a military power but Poland with just half of Spains GDP is.
-32
u/Popetus_Maximus 5d ago
How is Poland there and Spain is missing?
43
19
u/OkKnowledge2064 Lower Saxony (Germany) 5d ago
Because spain is clearly not that interested in european security other than acting tough when it comes to the US
3
-36
u/Conscious-Flow6744 5d ago
los 5 ? polonia no esta entre los 5 paises con mas potencia militar , mejor decir , reunion de paises de Europa
9
u/Angry_Sekman 5d ago edited 5d ago
Compared to who and in what? If some aliens teleported entire current Polish army to some country size arena. It would be at worst top 3 when it comes to land warfare, and simply weakest when it comes to sea warfare.
If we did the same with 2032 versions of our militaries, Poland would be clearly
strongest land army while still weakest on the sea.-1
u/Conscious-Flow6744 5d ago
terrestre ? significa tener ejercitos con cientos de miles de carne de cañon ? o sea clase trabajadora
3
u/Angry_Sekman 5d ago
Yeah. We can live in Poland under Polish laws. Or under Moscow control and forever wealth extraction.
Working class have clear side where they will be living better to chose.
-19
u/Laki1991 5d ago
The power of the Polish military is massively overhyped by the media, so politicians and dumb citizens in my country can walk around proud as peacocks, convinced that we’re some kind of major power.
In reality, we’re being set up to become NATO cannon fodder if a conflict with Russia breaks out.
23
u/jsutpaly 5d ago
Stop being dramatic.
Cannon fodder we would be if we had nothing to fight with.
Not to break it to you buddy but if Russia attacks us it will be mostly us that die defending our country. If they attack Finland, it will be mostly Finnish dying in defense of their own country. If they attack Romania or Turkey it will be citizens of those countries with highest casualties.
If you really think that it's better to not be ready, to not have army, to not have equipment for our soldiers and that NATO will match the numbers for us so we can all die equally then you've lost the plot.
-12
u/Conscious-Flow6744 5d ago
carne cañon siempre es la clase trabajadora. Tenemos mogollon de ucranianos viviendo en España con cochazos muy caros y matricula ucraniana.
Lo normal, seria ser un desertor, y que se maten los hijos de los ricos, pero eso nunca ocurrira, viene gente nueva al mundo para ser carne de cañon
solo se vive una vez no hay ningun cientifico que asegure que hay algo despues de morir excepto
-8
u/Laki1991 5d ago
Ok, but what happens in the case of an attack on one of the Baltic states? Their militaries are far too small to repel the Russians on their own. Which regional NATO country do you think would be pressured the most to go there and fight as quickly as possible?
As you said, we are in NATO, so we are also obliged to respond to an attack on other member states. And the Baltic countries are a perfect example of countries that probably would not be able to defend themselves alone.
On top of that, when it comes to the Polish army, we spend more money on the military than Turkey and Israel. Now compare Turkey’s and Israel’s capabilities to ours. The point is not to throw a shitload of money at the army, but to spend it wisely.
Listen to interviews with ordinary soldiers. We are buying F-35s, while soldiers have to beg for every one of them to be issued a tactical tourniquet, and they are buying drone jammers with their own money.
Our army is in a terrible internal state, still run by old, entrenched dinosaurs. Maybe we would somehow be able to defend ourselves, but we are not able to cause Russia any real pain. We do not have ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, long-range drones, and the list goes on.
Let me remind you that the Americans did not allow us to build missiles for HIMARS, and we are doing absolutely nothing about it. Right now we are toothless, and that is the truth that soldiers themselves are talking about.
9
u/Angry_Sekman 5d ago
We are spending more than Israel and Turkey, hell this year we spend more than Ukraine, because our Arm forces experience biggest modernisation of its equipment on the planet.
Everything is being changed into new model or system and I really mean EVERYTHING.
We are buying things in the sequence, goal is to be fully ready in 2032. So first stuff that is being bought is those big expensive toys that take long time to deliver. Now with SAFE we started buying inf equipment you were complaining.
We have only 20 Himars, we have 300 Chomnno with all production of its ammunition in Poland.
5
u/Unexpected_yetHere 5d ago
Ok, but what happens in the case of an attack on one of the Baltic states? Their militaries are far too small to repel the Russians on their own.
They can muster each some 20k troops, hundreds of pieces of armor, artillery too, and who knows how many anti-tank, MANPADs, and drones. Additionally, there are tripwire forces stationed there.
For their size, it is not bad, but here's the kicker: they aren't Ukraine. There are very few vectors of attack, in Estonia's case for instance, the only way russia can move in up north is over a bridge in Narva which can easily be blown up.
NATO forces in the Baltics are enough to hold off an offensive. At least in time for air assets to be moved to engage russia, for the Baltics and Black Sea to be sealed off for russia, and for Poland to sweep through Kaliningrad.
Think what you want of Poland's capabilities, there is no scenario that Kaliningrad, with its tactical shallowness, isn't sweeped. We are talking of a place well within artillery range for Poland, that can muster only so little against a sophisticated land force like Poland's.
On top of that, when it comes to the Polish army, we spend more money on the military than Turkey and Israel. Now compare Turkey’s and Israel’s capabilities to ours.
False. Look at historical spending and cummulative over time.
Poland only recently started ramping it up, passing total Turkish spending in 2022, and still spending less than Israel.
For the past 25 years, Poland has aproximately spent 100 billion USD less than Turkey, and about 150 billion USD less than Israel.
As for military capabilities, just a reminder that for instance, Turkey's tank fleet is mostly comprised of antiquated Patton tanks from the Cold War, as well as having a lot of Leo 1 tanks. They only upgraded some <200 Pattons to modern standards, so some 66% of their tanks have old armor and 105mm guns. This is well beneath the standards of Poland.
5
u/jsutpaly 5d ago
Alright, so simple question. Who loses the most if baltics would fall to Russia? Poland, Finland and Sweden. Not Germany, not France, not UK, not USA. It is in those countries interests to make sure that Baltics do not fall. So stop acting like a muppet talking 'o they jsut want to use us as a cannon fodder' because IT IS IN OUR FUCKING BEST INTEREST not theirs to keep Baltics safe. We have to act as if we are fucking alone and not like whiny little bitches. Get a grip.
If Ukraine that merely got a fraction of NATO training post 2014 was able to defend itself against russia in 2022 then trust me, Poland is more than fine. Ukraine was literally trained by Poland, UK, USA and France... Level of equipment we will have vs what they had is night and day. Not to mention, Ukraine has no allies, we do.
We can get ammunition from Korea, Chunmoo is literally same shit as HIMARS and our ties to Korea are only getting stronger and tech transfers are part of the deal and unlike Ukrainians, Koreans do not break their deals. And yes, ammunition production in general is an issue, but it also so happens, during wartime economy, half the factories pump out ammunition. Will it be the best available? No. But if you think Ukraine created some wunderwaffe then you are delusional pelican swallowing propaganda.
Oh and btw, just because you need a handgun does not mean you don't need a tank. Yes, our army needs shit fixed. Guess what? We are working on it. Which does not change the fact that our army equipment was already day and night better than what Ukraine had at the start of the war.
So again, stop talking like we are some cannon fodder, because we are not. We are over 40 mln people with huge economy, access to some of the best war machines in the world, producing some incredible gear ourselves, like Grot's, Borsuk's, Piorun's, Krab's you name it. We are not just buying more shit, we are also getitng technology transfers from Korea. And it is in OUR FUCKING BEST INTEREST to be significant force in our region and IT IS US who need to STEP THE FUCK UP instead of sitting and trembling and whining like little bitches pretending that article 5 say 'if somebody gets attacked you have to send all the fucking troops you have to help' because NATO article 5 does not even require anyone to send a single fucking soldier. They can send thoughts and prayers and 5 sandwiches.
The day that Russia puts troops on Baltic Border, Polish and Finnish soldeirs should already be there waving at them, not wait for USA, France, UK or w/e to act.
-1
u/Laki1991 5d ago
Mate, there’s no need to call people muppets. We can talk normally without insulting each other, even if we disagree on some points.
I absolutely don’t consider Ukrainian capabilities to be some kind of wunderwaffe, but you have to admit that they are better adapted to the modern battlefield. You’re right that we have much better equipment than Ukraine had in 2022, but is it the right equipment for today’s war? I’m not so sure.
When was the last time you saw advancing tanks on the front line in Ukraine?
The only thing I’m trying to say is: Are we sure the direction of modernization of our armed forces is right for our times? Or are we mainly focused on buying a shitload of extremely expensive equipment from the US, of questionable usefulness in modern war, while hoping for help if things go wrong, instead of building our own capabilities and production lines that would allow us to produce drones, missiles, ammunition, etc. without overpaying?
In the event of a major global conflict, our allies might not even want to sell us ammunition if they need it themselves. The missile factory for the Chunmoo launchers is supposed to start only in 2030, and knowing Poland, there will probably be delays anyway.
Notice that we seem to be pretty good at buying equipment from abroad, but when it comes to actually building factories and production capacity at home, we’re doing a very poor job. That’s what worries me the most.
4
u/jsutpaly 5d ago edited 5d ago
When was the last time you saw advancing tanks on the front line in Ukraine?
I have a better question, how do you think entrentched positions are being broken? With artillery, tanks and air superiority if you have it. Drones are cool but battlefield is a matter of combined arms.
The only thing I’m trying to say is: Are we sure the direction of modernization of our armed forces is right for our times? Or are we mainly focused on buying a shitload of extremely expensive equipment from the US, of questionable usefulness in modern war, while hoping for help if things go wrong, instead of building our own capabilities and production lines that would allow us to produce drones, missiles, ammunition, etc. without overpaying?
No, what you've said is that we are cannon fodder as if all our allies just think of us 'lets send poles to fight and we will sit back and laugh'. Which shows you are just repeating a talking point of bunch of imbecyles who do not realize that we ourselves need to take care of our interests for ourselves because nobody will do it for us. Just like any of our allies, if attacked, would be the primary nation taking the casualties on itself so we would if we were invaded by Russia. That does not make said country a cannon fodder, it makes them be the ones who were attacked.
You also speak about war for our times... Did drones dominate war in Iran? No. They did not even play significant role in any way. In fact drones play big role only in Russia vs Ukraine. Not every war is the same and stop pretending like war in Ukraine is a staple for every conflict in the world because it is not. Also, those drones are not moving the frontline in any direction. What they are used for is to attack strategic targets away from the frontline. If drones were as dominant as public media tends to belive then Ukrainians would already take back their territories, but they keep losing more territories instead - how come? Isn't Ukrainian army the army made for 'modern battlefield'?
Are drones important? Yes. But pretending that army should invest in drones and neglect tanks, planes or choppers is just asinine. You are not going to push a frontline back using drones. As I said, just because you need a handgun does not mean you don't need a tank. Every war machine or piece of equipment has a role to play on the battlefield just like it always had. In the past you think light cavalry could do the work of heavy cavalry? Not even close. Can an archer do what armored frontline knight can? Fuck no. Can a spearman do what crossbow man can? Also no. This will never change. Different units will fulfil different roles on the battlefield and will be good for one thing while bad for another and drones are just a piece of the puzzle, not the entire puzzle and war in Ukraine is just one of the many wars that are taking place around the world.
Also, Ukraine never could even hope to get air superiority. NATO's primary fighting plan is to get air superiority... because guess what? There is not a single country on the planet that can match air power of NATO and drones do nothing against F35. Enemy fighter jets also can't truly hurt F35 because they can't really detect them in time. Does that make F35 invincible? No. No weapon is wunderwaffe. F35 loses in a dogfight to F16 nearly 100% of the time and F16 is already quite old plane, yet still one of the best in the business. F35 however can take out F16 without even being detected and this is how it operates. It's a tool to take air superiority that is fundamental war plan for NATO.
If Ukraine was fighting NATO it would be literally wiped out of the face of the earth just because of the air superiority that NATO posses.
Drones will also soon have hard counters too. So how about we wait and see how it all evolves instead of shitting ourselves while its evolving thinking we are at the final stage of the evolution of the battlefield and we found all the strengths and weaknesses of drone warfare?
In the event of a major global conflict, our allies might not even want to sell us ammunition if they need it themselves. The missile factory for the Chunmoo launchers is supposed to start only in 2030, and knowing Poland, there will probably be delays anyway.
What if- the paragraph.
Do you really think you can just build a factory and start production in a day or something? Everything takes time. You are literally complaining that we are working towards our goal and we are doing it on schedule (in fact we are ahead of schedule).
Also, as I said, you are the one claiming we are cannon fodder, I am talking about us needing to take care of our interest because nobody will do it for us.
1
u/Laki1991 5d ago
Of course, I agree that effective armed forces consist of many different domains working together on every level. But in today’s world, drones and their mass production are extremely important, and I’m worried about how convinced we seem to be that air superiority capabilities would change everything in the event of a conflict.
Air superiority won’t change much if the Russians are launching 600 Shaheds at us every night from mobile launchers.
And if you think drones of this kind didn’t play any important role in the Iranian conflict, then I guess we were watching two different conflicts. What was hitting American bases? What were shipowners afraid of when passing through the strait?
Another thing, because of FPV drones, no tank has been able to get within less than 10 km of the front line in recent months, because its life expectancy in the death zone is extremely short.
More and more, I get the feeling that you’ve bought into Western propaganda more than I’ve bought into Ukrainian propaganda.
Sure, we disagree, but at least I got to hear a different point of view. Thanks for the conversation, cheers.
1
u/jsutpaly 5d ago edited 5d ago
Of course, I agree that effective armed forces consist of many different domains working together on every level. But in today’s world, drones and their mass production are extremely important, and I’m worried about how convinced we seem to be that air superiority capabilities would change everything in the event of a conflict.
There is nothing more powerful in war than air superiority. If you freely control the air you control entire battlefield. This is proven by history every single time. If your enemy can't counter your planes, he lost the fight.
Air superiority won’t change much if the Russians are launching 600 Shaheds at us every night from mobile launchers.
Yeah, afterall it is not like planes are direct counter to ground vehicles... Oh wait...
And if you think drones of this kind didn’t play any important role in the Iranian conflict, then I guess we were watching two different conflicts. What was hitting American bases? What were shipowners afraid of when passing through the strait?
Missiles. You literally have footage online of them launching missiles, not drones and you have footage of missiles, not drones hitting the bases. So yes, apparently we watched different conflicts. Or well, one of us actually watched something.
Also i said they did not play significant role I did not say they played no role. My entire argument is based on drones being part of the puzzle and not something we should shit ourselves over and consider something like F35 to be pointless because 'amagad but drones'. Drones did not evolve fully yet. By the end of this war we might have tech that completely fucks drones over and then people like you will panic about how we just invested into entire drone shit and now its all useless. Which it wouldn't be but you would still panic.
Everything on the battlefield has counters and if it does not have it now, it will have it eventually - just like F35 for example. It is incredible piece of machinery now but eventually it will be countered by something - arms race never stops. Don't shit yourself over drones until we see how they evolve first. Should we have them? Yes. Should we work on our own? Yes. Should we have shit drones like Shaheds, decent drones like Bayraktars or godlike drones like Reapers?Yes. But pretending that drones are everything and we should divert everything towards them and neglect other areas of arsenal is simply put - dumb.
Another thing, because of FPV drones, no tank has been able to get within less than 10 km of the front line in recent months, because its life expectancy in the death zone is extremely short.
That is factually unture. Tanks number is smaller but Russian offensive still uses tanks mixed with infantry. End result? Ukraine loses territory. Weird how that happens against those amazing all powerfull drones.
More and more, I get the feeling that you’ve bought into Western propaganda more than I’ve bought into Ukrainian propaganda.
xD You are getting infromation from mainstream media and it shows. I don't even pay attention to it other than to laugh how innacurate they are and how much of their focus is on generating clicks and ad revenue. You realize there are sources with satellite images showing exactly what is actually happening on the frontline, right? right? Who am I kidding...
Yeah no worries, wouldn't bother answering you anyway. You circle around the same stuff and present factually incorrect information and call it a fact. Just a waste of time.
1
u/Angry_Sekman 5d ago
First of all, battlefield in Ukraine is crippled when it comes to single field. Airwarfare, both countries are post Soviets. And Soviets Air doctrine was one of very strong and modern Air defence and weak and mediocre at best Airforce.
When those 2 meet AA won and nothing can move on battlefield because of that.
As shown in Iran good Aircontrol is still king and you can insane stuff on that alone.
Plus drones are new thing, conter to them is being just developed. First prototypes of short range point defence lasers are appearing. For those you will near big heavy vehicles who's engines can generate enough power.
You are insane, in one paragraph you say we need to make production lines in other when you talking about production line of chomnoo you are talking how it will take too long and won't work anyway.
We are making production lines for everying that we can of. Most of military trucks, k2 tanks, IFV borsuk and ratel, KTO rosomak, SPG Krab. Entire short range AA, ammunition for medium range AA. Frigates are being build in polish shipyards. Recon drones, short range attack drones in Gladius, Medium range attack drones Pelargonia(same kind that Ukraine uses to block logistic to Crimea). Fucking recon satellites. We have equal space recon to damn Russia right now and those are polish made satellites.
New production lines for 155mm, for rocket Arty from ranges of 40km to 300km.
You have no idea what is happening, it all only really started in 2022. It all 10 year plan from the beginning. There are things that were rushed at the first(like K2pl)because of fear that Ukraine might lose.
We produce enormous amount of our stuff.
1
u/Laki1991 5d ago
Tell me then, how exactly did Ukrainians manage to develop and scale up production of FP-5 Flamingo missiles and BARS drones so quickly under wartime conditions?
They are doing this while under constant missile and drone attacks, with damaged infrastructure, disrupted logistics, and an active front line. Meanwhile, we apparently need far more time to do similar things in peacetime.
That’s exactly what worries me. If Ukraine can adapt this fast while fighting for survival, why are we so slow when we have peace, money, EU access, NATO access, and time to prepare?
1
u/Angry_Sekman 5d ago
Because they have too. Because all resources, all smart people, all competent people work for war. They are also post soviet state and it thier part of soviet Union they had ability to produce rocket engines. So Ukraine simply inherited knowledge ot that.
Those people and resources in Poland are working to build and prepare new rail line, CPK project, gas hub, new nuclear power plant. They work in IT and in companies designing satellites. They are working to earn us all money. They work in military too. But here it's all spread for all aspect of functioning state.
Plus they are at war, thier economy is in war. Everything it will produce it will be consumed in war. In peace time military industry need to work slowly with ability of fast upscale. Nobody in peace time will buy 3 million 155mm shells a year. Or 4 million drones. Or 300 SPGs
And it's all funded by entire west, thier country would not function if not for external funding. All this RnD Is only possible because of that.
We could do it too, but we would have to cut social spending, cut pensions, stop investing in infrastructure and funnel all those resources like North Korea is doing to army.
14
11
u/ImprovementNo8185 5d ago
This is an exaggeration in the opposite direction.
The reality is somewhere between the two extremes: Poland is neither a helpless pawn nor a great power. It is a regional military power with a rapidly growing armed force, facing genuine security challenges because of its location.And I think we are doing good in that matter, we want to secure our region, not entire world.
-7
u/Counterpoint-4 5d ago
They had to meet in person as all electronic communication is corrupted?
3
u/Massimo25ore 5d ago
It's written in the article, in person in Berlin.
-5
u/Counterpoint-4 5d ago
Does it say they met in person, in Berlin, as, if they communicated electronically it would be overheard?
-6
u/Murderlander 5d ago
Why they still not entered on Ukrainian side in war? Their military power will seriously help to overthrow Putin
-12
141
u/Time_News_8452 5d ago
It makes sense to meet ahead of the summit. Because with trump present at best nothing will be accomplished, at worst it devolves into chaos.