29 octobre 2018 | International, Aérospatial

Pourquoi la Belgique (et d’autres pays européens) préfèrent acheter des avions de chasse américains?

La Belgique, tout comme l'Italie et les Pays-Bas, ont préféré acheter américain plutôt qu'européen pour leur défense aérienne. Et ce n'est ni le prix, ni les capacités techniques du F-35 qui les ont convaincu, mais leurs alliances.

Le “contrat du siècle” belge est tombé dans les mains des Américains: jeudi, la Belgique a officialisé le choix de l'avion de chasse F-35 du groupe américain Lockheed Martin pour remplacer sa flotte d'avions de chasse F-16, écartant le Rafale du français Dassault et le Typhoon du consortium européen Eurofighter. Un achat estimé à 3,6 milliards d'euros.

Une décision qui passe mal auprès des partenaires européens de la Belgique. Emmanuel Macron a dit dès le lendemain regretter "la décision du gouvernement belge d'acheter des avions de chasse F-35 américains "plutôt qu'une offre européenne", une décision qui "stratégiquement va a contrario des intérêts européens".

La Belgique a choisi son allié américain

La Belgique n'est pas le premier pays de l'UE a mettre un coup de canif dans l'Europe de la Défense. L'Italie et les Pays-Bas ont déjà fait le choix du F-35 plutôt que d'un avion européen.

Si la Belgique justifie son choix pour des raisons techniques: coordination plus simple avec les pays voisins (comme les Pays-Bas), emport de bombes, interopérabilité au sein de l'Otan... la raison serait surtout diplomatique.

"Le choix de l'avion de chasse fait partie des achats les plus stratégiques pour un pays. C'est une arme de souveraineté et choisir une technologie, c'est s'engager pour 30 ou 40 ans. Vous êtes ensuite pieds et poings liés avec votre fournisseur", affirme Philippe Plouvier, directeur associé au Boston Consulting Group sur les questions de défense et d'aéronautique. "Si vous faites une carte du monde, des achats d'avions de chasse par pays, c'est très révélateur des alliances. Quand la Belgique choisit le F-35, elle choisit un parapluie de défense américain plutôt que franco-allemand", poursuit-il.

Une explication que donne aussi, à demi-mot, ce vendredi le premier ministre belge Charles Michel: "Pour moi les Etats-Unis ne sont pas devenus un ennemi parce que Donald Trump est président". Et malgré les "divergences de vues" avec Washington "la sécurité pour nos petits-enfants sera liée au maintien et au renforcement d'une double alliance, européenne et transatlantique".

Un avion très cher et pas encore opérationnel

Car mieux vaut rester ami avec le pays qui vous vend des avions de chasse. Le choix du F-35 ferre la Belgique: "que se soit en termes de pièces détachés ou de mise à jour logicielle... Sans les Etats-Unis, les F-35 belges n'iront pas très loin”, concède Philippe Plouvier.

Pour justifier leur choix, les Belges ne pourront en tout cas pas brandir l'argument du prix. Le coût du développement du F-35 a explosé les estimations de départ. L'avion collectionne les problèmes techniques et "il n'atteint pas encore les performances prévues initialement, notamment en termes de furtivité", reconnait Philippe Plouvier.

Si 300 appareils ont déjà été livrés (principalement aux Etats-Unis, Canada et Royaume-Uni), les tests opérationnels du F-35 se finiront en 2019. Les pays qui l'ont choisi doivent donc s'attendre à voir la facture s'alourdir pour profiter des améliorations futures. "Ce qui est révolutionnaire dans cet avion, ce ne sont ni ses moteurs, ni sa structure, mais son logiciel embarqué. Les mises à jour auront un prix", promet-il.

La fin de l'Europe de la défense?

Les deux "perdants" du contrat belge n'ont pas tardé à réagir. Le Français Dassault Aviation a évoqué dans un communiqué un "mauvais signal pour la construction de l'Europe de la défense". De son côté d'Airbus, partenaire du programme Eurofighter, regrette "l'opportunité manquée de renforcer la coopération industrielle européenne au moment où l'on demande à l'Union Européenne de s'unir en matière de Défense".

Les deux entreprises continuent en tout cas de travailler en commun pour le projet de Système de combat aérien futur (Scaf), voulu notamment par le président français Emmanuel Macron. "L'Europe doit développer une vraie capacité d'industrie de défense européenne, dans tous les pays qui croient à cette aventure. Ma détermination en sort renforcée", a-t-il déclaré vendredi.

"Tout n'est pas perdu. La France, l'Allemagne et le Royaume-Uni ont la volonté de créer cet avion européen du futur", juge Philippe Plouvier. Pour le spécialiste, c'est peut-être un mal pour un bien que beaucoup de pays européens ne soient pas concernés. "Il faut reproduire l'exemple réussi du missilier européen MBDA, qui est compétitif, technologiquement haut de gamme et où la France et le Royaume-Uni ont un partage équilibré des responsabilités". Et éviter de reproduire les erreurs des programmes de l'avion de transport militaire A400M et celui de l'Eurofighter "avec des surcoûts, et de l'éparpillement industriel".

https://www.bfmtv.com/economie/pourquoi-la-belgique-et-d-autres-pays-europeens-preferent-acheter-des-avions-de-chasse-americains-1552975.html

Sur le même sujet

  • The US Navy, seeking savings, shakes up its plans for more lethal attack submarines

    23 avril 2019 | International, Naval

    The US Navy, seeking savings, shakes up its plans for more lethal attack submarines

    By: David B. Larter WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy is shaking up its plan for acquiring a new, much larger and more deadly version of its Virginia-class attack submarine it aims to start buying this year. The plan heading into this year was to start a contract on the 5th block of Virginias in October, beginning with an upgraded version of the block-four Virginia (a “straight-stick” Virginia), then the second boat in 2019 would be the first boat with the added with 84-foot section known as the Virginia Payload Module, designed to expand the Virginia's Tomahawk strike missile load-out from 12 to 40. The rest of the 10-ship buy was suppose to have the VPM, a move designed to offset the retirement of the four 154-Tomahawk-packing guided missile submarines in the mid-2020s. But the Navy is looking for savings and things have changed heading into the 2020 budget cycle. Instead of nine of 10 block-five Virginias being VPM boats, the Navy is proposing to Congress that they add a third Virginia in 2020, but the first boat will be another “straight-stick.” Then in 2021, the Navy will return to buying two Virginias, but the first boat again will be a straight-stick and the second will have VPM. All the block five boats, VPM and otherwise, will have acoustic upgrades. The net effect will be one fewer Virginia Payload Module in the block-five buy. Instead of nine of 10 boats in the buy having VPM, the Navy is proposing that eight of 11 boats have the VPM, deferring the VPM presumably to Virginia Block Six, which is slated to begin in 2024. The last-minute shuffling of the deck on Virginia, which includes pushing out VPM boats for which Congress had already appropriated advanced procurement money, shifts what was originally supposed to be the end of the straight-stick Virginias this year to buying one new straight stick a year for the next three years. This has raised concerns among those in the submarine building industry because of the potential for disruptions in the workflow at the yards, which is carefully planned out years in advance, and could even bleed over into the new, strategically vital Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine program. “Just like there is one rule in real estate (‘location, location, location'), there is one rule in building ships: Predictability, predictability, predictability,” said Dan Gouré, a former Bush Administration defense official and military analyst with the Arlington-based Lexington Institute. “And they are messing with that now, for the first time in quite a while. And that makes no sense.” The late changes have also affected the timeline for contract negotiations, and a source with knowledge of the details said a planned April contract date for block five is now unlikely. The date had already slipped from the beginning of the fiscal year in October, according to 2018 budget documents. The Virginia-class program has begun seeing creeping delays which the Navy acknowledged this year will likely be between four and seven months on each boat for the foreseeable future. The service says it has struggled to meet more aggressive construction timelines because of issues within the supplier base, which are causing delays. A spokesman for the Navy's research, development and acquisition office said he wouldn't comment on precisely what savings would be achieved with the strategy, citing ongoing negotiations, but said the move of a matter of competing priorities within the budget. He also said the changes in the VPM schedule were not part of ongoing supplier challenges. “To support the Navy's PB-20 request the decision to delay VPMs in FY-20 and 21 was based on competing requirements,” said Capt. Danny Hernandez, RD&A spokesman. “This was not based on any issues with shipbuilding or supply chain.” Added Wrinkle The third boat in 2020 also adds a wrinkle to the schedule. According to the Navy's justification books, the third boat will not start construction until 2023, which is the year before the service plans to buy a second Columbia-class boomer. That means the shipyards will be building three Virginias in 2023. The Virginia Payload Module strategy of continuing to buy straight-stick Virginias into 2021, ensures that General Dynamics Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls Newport News will be building both straight sticks and Virginia Payload Module Virginia-class boats and the Columbia class simultaneously through 2026 and beyond, according to Navy budget documents. That will stress the yards and the supplier base, raising the risk that Columbia could run late, according to an industry source who spoke on background. “The juxtaposition of Virginia VPM and Columbia will be an added challenge for the shipyards,” the source said. “VPM and Columbia will have no learning curves when both projects are started. As we saw with Seawolf and Virginia (and every other first of a class ship the Navy has ever built) first ships are late and over cost. “Unfortunately, with the delay to the original program, Congress and the Navy have run the clock down, so there is no margin for Columbia to be late.” The mounting challenges within the submarine building enterprise prompted RD&A chief James Geurts to stand up a new program office specifically for the Columbia class, which was previously organized under Program Executive Office Submarines. Rear Adm. Scott Pappano is heading the new enterprise. “My concern was with Columbia being our No. 1 acquisition priority and all the other submarine activities we have going on, do we have enough leadership bandwidth available to oversee and run all those programs simultaneously?” Geurts said in an early March roundtable with reporters. “As I understand the challenges going forward, [I wanted to] get PEO-level support to that program as it starts ramping up. And I didn't want to wait for a crisis for that to occur; I wanted to make sure we are proactively working the program.” https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2019/04/04/the-us-navy-seeking-savings-shakes-up-its-plans-for-more-lethal-attack-submarines/

  • Qatar signs up for Leonardo's IFTS

    13 novembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    Qatar signs up for Leonardo's IFTS

    by Charles Forrester Qatari pilots will soon be training at Italy's International Flight Training School (IFTS), following an agreement between the Qatar's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of State for Defence Affairs, Dr Khalid bin Mohamed al-Attiyah, and Italy's minister of defence Lorenzo Guerini on 11 November. In a release by the Italian Ministry of Defence, Guerini said, “The partnership between Italy and Qatar in the defence sector is confirmed as having a high strategic value. I am here to renew our commitment to deepen the ongoing collaboration that embraces all sectors.” Part of the two countries' co-operation agreement would include the training of Qatar Emiri Air Force (QEAF) pilots at the IFTS, which is operated as a joint venture by Leonardo and the Italian Air Force at Lecce-Galatina, and the soon-to-be-opened facility at Decimomannu Air Base in Sardinia. Qatar currently operates the Pilatus PC-21 and PAC Super Mushshak aircraft in the training role. The country has also ordered nine BAE Systems Hawk Advanced Jet Trainers. According to Janes World Air Forces, in-country flight training is conducted at Qatar's Armed Forces Air Academy (also known as the Al Zaeem Mohammed bin Abdullah Al Attiyah Air College), established at Al Udeid in 2014. The establishment of the academy is seen as a tangible step towards bringing additional training capacity within Qatar's borders, rather than the heavy reliance upon foreign states and allies that Qatar has previously required. https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/qatar-signs-up-for-leonardos-ifts

  • China may use Japan’s aircraft carrier plan to push through more military spending

    20 décembre 2018 | International, Aérospatial, Naval

    China may use Japan’s aircraft carrier plan to push through more military spending

    Minnie Chan Tokyo's plan to develop an aircraft carrier capable of launching fighter jets is driven by Beijing's military rise, but the move could embolden hawkish generals in China to press ahead with their own expansion programmes, observers said. The ruling Liberal Democratic Party and its junior coalition partner Komeito Party this week approved a new defence guideline that will effectively allow the Japanese military to convert naval vessels currently capable of carrying only helicopters into fully operational aircraft carriers able to launch fighter jets like the F-35. The plan is controversial as under its pacifist constitution, Japan has never before owned such advanced naval hardware. Full article: https://amp.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/2178102/china-may-use-japans-aircraft-carrier-plan-push-through-more

Toutes les nouvelles