Europe’s Long-Range Strike Capability: Closing the Defense Gap

Europe is stepping up its defense game, and at the heart of this transformation is the development of a robust, conventional long-range strike capability. Six European nations are collaborating on the European Long-range Strike Approach (ELSA) to address a critical strategic gap, especially when compared to Russia’s existing missile arsenal. What does this mean for the future of European security and NATO’s overall defense posture?

The European Long-Range Strike Approach (ELSA): A Collaborative Effort

The ELSA coalition is a strategic alliance aimed at developing a ground-launched, long-range strike system. as of July 2024, France, Germany, Poland, and italy signed a letter of intent, with Sweden and the U.K. joining in October. This initiative seeks to bolster European NATO members’ capabilities, which currently lag behind Russia’s.

Jean-Louis Thiériot, a French deputy on the National Assembly’s defense committee, mentioned during a hearing that the project has identified 13 development pillars, and plans are underway to assign responsibility for each pillar in June. The “best athlete” approach will determine leadership in each segment, leveraging the strengths of individual nations and companies.

France’s Pivotal Role and the “Best Athlete” Approach

France is set to play a significant role in the ELSA project,particularly through Ariane Group,which will lead the ballistics segment. This “best athlete” approach underscores a commitment to efficiency and leveraging existing expertise within each participating country. the goal is to avoid bureaucratic delays and ensure a streamlined development process.

Addressing the Capability Gap: Why Long-Range Strike Matters

European NATO members face a significant capability gap in long-range strike compared to Russia.The International Institute for Strategic Studies reports that Russia operates ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges between 500 and 2,500 kilometers, capable of reaching targets across Europe. ELSA aims to close this gap, providing a crucial deterrent and enhancing European security.

Ballistic vs. Cruise Missiles: advantages and Strategic Implications

The ELSA project is considering both ballistic and cruise missile technologies, each offering unique advantages. Ballistic missiles are ideal for targeting fixed locations, while cruise missiles allow for precision strikes against both fixed and mobile targets. A combination of both technologies would provide a well-rounded and versatile strike capability.

According to the French artillery report, ground-based long-range strike capabilities would complement existing air and sea-launched cruise missiles. Diversifying delivery systems increases options for political decision-makers and provides an additional offensive vector for managing potential escalations.

“The commitment of all joint strike assets at great depth would make it possible to combine trajectories and saturate the enemy’s defenses at specific points, forcing them into dilemmas,” the French artillery report stated.

The French Outlook: Nuclear deterrence and Deep Strike Capabilities

France’s lack of a land-based, deep-strike capability creates a potential vulnerability in its defense strategy. ELSA could bridge the gap between nuclear deterrence and conventional forces, providing a non-nuclear option for long-range strikes. This capability would be separate from France’s plans to replace its rocket artillery.

Streamlined Cooperation: Avoiding Bureaucratic Pitfalls

One of the key strengths of the ELSA project is its efficient, streamlined approach. Thiériot emphasized the political will to move forward without getting bogged down in bureaucratic red tape. This contrasts with mechanisms like the European Defense Fund, which can be cumbersome due to the need for numerous partners.

“There is a real desire for efficiency,” Thiériot noted. “It’s something that can work, both in the French interest and in the European interest, so it really seems like a good model to me. We’ll talk about it again in a year.”

Industry involvement and Technological Considerations

While companies like Ariane Group, MBDA, Safran, and Thales have been approached for comment, MBDA has already proposed its Land Cruise Missile as a short-term solution for ELSA.This highlights the industry’s readiness to contribute to the project and provide viable options for enhancing Europe’s strike capabilities.

The development of both ballistic and cruise missile technologies is crucial. Ballistic tech primarily focuses on fixed targets, while cruise missiles allow for precision strikes on both fixed or mobile targets. The ideal range for these strike capabilities is between 1,500 to 2,000 kilometers.

Ground-Based Systems: Overcoming Access Denial

The deep strike capabilities of the French Navy and Air Force face constraints due to air defenses and access denial. A land-based system could offer greater adaptability,including for opportunistic targeting. Feedback from hearings and visits to Ukraine suggests that interception rates for ground-based ballistic missiles by air defenses remain substantially lower than for cruise missiles.

If budgetary constraints necessitate choosing one technology, developing ground-based ballistic technology for long-range strike is paramount, according to the report. However, a dual approach incorporating both technologies would be the most effective solution.

New Developments: Turgis Gaillard’s Foudre System

French defense manufacturer Turgis Gaillard announced a truck-mounted long-range strike system called Foudre, capable of firing both French and allied munitions. The company plans to showcase the system at the Paris air Show in June. This system is designed to complement existing initiatives and provide a sovereign solution for critical fire control and missile technologies.

Current Projects and Future Directions for Europe’s Long-Range Strike Capability

France’s Directorate General for Armament is already collaborating with Safran and MBDA, as well as Ariane Group and Thales, to develop a tactical strike capability in the 150-kilometer range. This project aims to replace the French Army’s aging rocket launchers. Turgis Gaillard has positioned its system as complementary, capable of firing munitions developed by these consortiums.

Matthieu Bloch, a member of parliament and co-author of the artillery report, emphasized that fire control and missiles for the launcher are critical elements requiring a sovereign solution, while chassis and launch pods are non-critical elements.

Given the context of the interview, what are the potential economic costs associated with developing and maintaining ELSA, considering the diverse capabilities and resources needed across the participating nations?

Europe’s Long-Range Strike Capability: An Interview with Dr. Anya Petrova

Archyde News Editor: Welcome, dr.Petrova. Thank you for joining us today to discuss the development of Europe’s long-range strike capabilities. Can you start by giving us an overview of the European Long-range Strike Approach, or ELSA, and its significance in the current geopolitical landscape?

Dr. Anya Petrova: Thank you for having me. ELSA is a collaborative initiative involving several European nations – specifically France, Germany, Poland, Italy, Sweden, and the U.K. – aimed at developing a ground-launched, long-range strike system. its primary goal is to address a significant capability gap that exists, especially when comparing European defense capabilities to Russia’s existing missile arsenal. This is crucial for deterring potential aggression and bolstering European security.

Closing the Defense Gap: The Need for Long-Range Strike

Archyde News Editor: Why is this capability gap so critical? What specific threats are ELSA designed to counter?

Dr. Anya Petrova: The gap primarily stems from Russia’s deployment of ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles that can reach targets across Europe. These weapons pose a considerable threat, and ELSA aims to provide a credible deterrent. The project is focused on both ballistic and cruise missile technologies,each with its own advantages.Ballistic missiles are excellent for fixed targets, while cruise missiles offer versatility against both fixed and mobile targets. A dual approach will provide that significant flexibility in a potential conflict scenario.

The “Best Athlete” Approach: Streamlining Development

Archyde News Editor: One of the key aspects of ELSA seems to be its streamlined approach. How does the “best athlete” model, where different nations take the lead on specific components, contribute to the project’s efficiency?

Dr. Anya Petrova: The “best athlete” approach is key to ELSA’s efficiency. By leveraging the existing expertise of individual nations and companies, the project seeks to avoid the bureaucratic delays frequently enough associated with multinational defense projects. for instance, France, through Ariane Group, is set to play a significant role in the ballistics segment. This model allows for a more focused, streamlined development process and can ensure that the project meets deadlines.

Ballistic vs. Cruise Missiles: A Dual Approach

Archyde News Editor: Coudl you elaborate on the strategic implications of incorporating both ballistic and cruise missile technologies? What advantages does each offer?

Dr. Anya petrova: Ballistic missiles are particularly effective against fixed infrastructure and strategic assets, while cruise missiles offer the capability to strike both fixed and mobile targets with a high degree of precision. The combination provides strategic depth, offering political decision-makers multiple options and enhancing the flexibility of operations. The goal is to create a versatile strike capability, a more robust deterrent and a wider range of strategic advantages.

Industry Involvement and Future Directions

Archyde News Editor: We’ve seen industry players like MBDA already proposing solutions. How important is industry collaboration to the success of ELSA, and what are the anticipated technological advancements in this field?

Dr. Anya Petrova: Collaboration with industry is absolutely critical. Companies like MBDA, Safran, and Thales are all poised to contribute. The development of both missile technologies, along with fire control systems will drive many advancements. The pursuit of technologies capable of precision strikes at the 1,500 to 2,000-kilometer range is a strategic priority for European defenses.

Ground-Based Systems: Overcoming Access Denial

Archyde News Editor: Ground-based systems are a key element of the project. what is the strategic advantage of such a system in comparison with air and sea-launched options?

Dr. Anya Petrova: Ground based systems give more flexibility, especially when faced with issues like access denial, the ability to be launched at various locations and lower interception rates. the current projects and future directions for Europe is in the development of long-range strike capabilities.

Looking Ahead: The Future of European Security

Archyde News Editor: Dr.Petrova, what are the long-term implications of ELSA for European security and its relationship with NATO?

Dr. Anya Petrova: ELSA signifies a pivotal step towards greater European defense autonomy. By establishing an independent long-range strike capability, Europe augments its role within NATO and enhances its ability to contribute to collective defense. This provides a crucial deterrent, demonstrates the political willingness to support European security, and ensures that Europe can fully take control of its own defense needs.

Archyde News Editor: dr. Petrova, thank you for sharing your expertise and insights with us today. It’s been a very insightful conversation.

Dr. Anya Petrova: Thank you for having me.

Archyde News Editor: To our audience: What are your thoughts on the future of European defense? Share your opinions in the comments below.