Originally Posted by
melmothtw
Don't see how this is 'a finger' to anyone in NATO, much less to France and Germany in particular.
Nothing happens in a vacuum. (Mind you, it may be a simple matter of a price point...)
But here's what I see as
informing the choice of the Swedes. This is somewhat political, of course, but it is very much related to
a practical military matter that enters into theater level and strategic level planning:
Can you count on a
timely response by your so-called allies?
This is why I call out the Germans and the French in particular.
Why is that?
In the last five years, and even more in the last 18 months, I've read a variety of perspectives on how shabbily the Germans and the French treat, in general, the Visigrad states in the EU (NATO overlap is a common thread in most cases).
Since NATO action requires unanimity, the
timeliness one can expect from the (blatantly lackluster) response of the Germans and the French in the current mess in Ukraine has (I suspect) redoubled and reinforced the concern which Poland - as a border/buffer state - has about a
timely response.
They (1) want updated AEW, and (2) they do not believe that the alliance will provide a
timely response with the collective asset.
Am I reading a bit too much into this? Perhaps.
I tell you again, nothing happens in a vacuum when it comes to weapons acquisition.
Ask any of the old hands at Sikorsky about the Blackhawk sale to Spain, back some years, and the timely release of Basque prisoners from France, and their extradition to Spain, that informed the choice of medium helicopter.
On the other hand, yes, it
could be as simple as a price point.