German Defence Ministry officials have advised Berlin to form a new fighter jet partnership with Sweden and Spain rather than join an existing UK-led consortium.

Internal ministry assessment notes obtained by Politico state that a trilateral arrangement among Germany, Sweden, and Spain represents a “more advantageous and promising” approach than joining the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) run by the UK, Italy, and Japan.

The proposal outlined in the document does not yet represent a final government decision, nor does it contain any indication that German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius has approved the recommendation.

The advice was drafted after Germany’s flagship project with France to build a next-generation fighter jet collapsed in June following years of industrial infighting.

Initiated in 2017 and later joined by Spain, the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) was conceived as a showcase initiative for European defence cooperation. The partnership aimed to develop an aircraft to replace Germany’s Eurofighter fleet starting in 2040.

However, the initiative foundered on disputes over operational control and workshare between France-based Dassault and Germany-based Airbus Defence and Space. Following unsuccessful rescue attempts at the political level, Berlin withdrew from the joint fighter project this year.

UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham raised the prospect of Germany joining GCAP during an 8 October meeting in Berlin with Friedrich Merz. The two leaders agreed that officials should continue discussions.

For Berlin, the choice carries implications that reach far beyond which model its air force will fly. The decision will determine who controls future military technology, which countries secure production contracts, and whether a new European partnership can avoid the frictions that dismantled FCAS.

Ministry assessment keeps distance from UK-partnered GCAP project

The ministry assessment listed several reservations regarding the GCAP project. The report argued that the existing programme focuses on operations beyond Germany’s capability requirements, whereas Berlin needs an aircraft better suited for missions over continental Europe.

The document also noted that German manufacturers would struggle to secure a significant share of development and production work within an already established partnership.

Invoking past experiences with the Eurofighter programme, which was developed in the 1990s and entered service in the early 2000s, the document took direct aim at British defence contractor BAE Systems.

The German Defence Ministry assessment accused BAE Systems of prioritizing exports over the development interests of Germany and Italy, warning that British dominance would prove incompatible with an equal partnership.

By contrast, the document stated that the military requirements of Germany, Sweden, and Spain align closely and that their starting positions are well balanced.

The assessment proposed an industrial partnership between aerospace giant Airbus and Sweden’s Saab, while recommending that the Saab-manufactured Gripen E fighter jet serve as a technological stepping stone until the new aircraft is developed.

The German Defence Ministry declined to comment on the matter. A separate ministry note, however, recorded British efforts to integrate Germany into GCAP as an observer or participant, asking German officials to examine potential industrial roles and military requirements.

An Airbus spokesperson said the company was “generally open to cooperation”, provided that German and Spanish industry secured a “substantial and equal role” across development, production, and operational phases.

“Purely political decisions without an industrial foundation remain insufficient,” the spokesperson said, urging authorities in Berlin and Madrid to clarify the path forward swiftly.

In an interview published in Handelsblatt on Monday, Airbus defence chief Michael Schollhorn pointed to ties with Saab, noting that the two companies have always worked well together.

A Saab spokesperson also indicated that the company is receptive to broad defence cooperation, including in fighter aircraft.

Emphasizing that large-scale collaborative projects are handled at the political level and that participation decisions rest with the respective governments, the spokesperson said: “All questions regarding potential Swedish participation should be directed to the Swedish government. Saab stands ready, as always, to support Sweden’s future fighter aircraft requirements.”

A comprehensive military operation planned by the Israeli military for 10 October did not take place because US President Donald Trump chose to avoid a broad conflict before the 3 November congressional midterm elections.

Preparations had been made on the orders of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for an aerial bombardment meant to last several days, according to a report by the Financial Times citing sources familiar with the matter.

The list of targets included nuclear facilities and locations associated with the Iranian leadership, along with power stations and other civilian infrastructure sites.

The planned strikes were projected to exceed the joint operation launched by the US and Israel in February in terms of intensity.

White House Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly told the newspaper: “The United States is not going to strike Iran at any point before the midterms.”

Kelly argued that the administration in Tehran was in distress both economically and militarily, adding that the blockade imposed on Iranian ports and US efforts to secure oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz were producing results.

Speaking to the newspaper, one source addressed the possibility of strikes resuming in the coming weeks, saying: “There’s either going to be a deal or a strike.”

The same source reported that Washington aims for a comprehensive settlement that resolves the conflict over both the Strait of Hormuz and the nuclear programme, although it remained unclear whether the US would have participated directly in the cancelled operation.

Another source said the preparations for the operation might have served as leverage to pressure Tehran in negotiations, adding that the final decision on any new military step rests with the US president.

Hegseth reviews updated target list in Israel

An Israeli official said US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth visited Israel on 19 October to meet with Netanyahu and senior representatives.

Another source stated that the Israeli side presented an updated target list to its American counterparts, compiled with fresh intelligence and incorporating civilian infrastructure sites that had not been struck earlier this year.

The Pentagon did not respond to questions regarding the meetings, while Netanyahu’s office and the Israeli military declined to comment.

Despite the postponement of the operation, Trump and Netanyahu continued to issue military warnings to Iran in public.

In a video released on 19 October, Netanyahu addressed Trump, saying: “Donald, you said we need to finish this, and we will finish it together.” Speaking on speakerphone, Trump responded: “You’re a great warrior, and we’re going to prove it very soon.”

These engagements between the leaders coincide with critical election cycles in both countries.

Parliamentary elections in Israel are scheduled for 27 October, one week before the vote in the US.

Most public opinion polls in the country show the opposition bloc holding a narrow lead over Netanyahu’s coalition, though neither side commands a clear majority.

Axios, a US-based news outlet, previously reported that the Pentagon instructed military planners to finalize strike plans against Iran, though the directive specified no date and Trump had not reached a final decision.

On 15 October, CNN reported on plans to use the GBU-43/B munition, known as the “mother of all bombs”, against Iranian nuclear facilities, with US officials who spoke to the broadcaster expressing scepticism about the weapon’s ability to destroy deep bunkers.

While Tehran announced that it remains open to a diplomatic solution, it declared that any potential operation would draw a fierce response.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stressed that if its adversaries chose military conflict, the response would be “much harsher than before”.

Following the joint operation launched by the US and Israel on 28 February, Iran retaliated by striking targets across the region and restricting maritime passage through the Strait of Hormuz.

Although the parties reached an agreement in June covering a ceasefire and negotiations to lift the blockade in the strait, reciprocal strikes between the US and Iran have not ceased.

The European Union plans to persuade Britain and Canada to step up their assistance to close Ukraine’s projected 70 billion euro funding deficit in 2027.

Brussels aims to raise the issue during summits with Canada on 29-30 October and with Britain on 20 November, according to a Politico report citing European officials and diplomats.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, speaking at a summit in Brussels earlier this month, said the country’s military expenditure would reach 155 billion euros in 2027, requesting an additional 70 billion euros from European leaders.

The administration in Brussels wants to bring other allies into play, noting that a previously approved 90 billion euro loan is insufficient to meet all the costs.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen recalled that the EU and its member states have shouldered 80% of external aid provided to Ukraine, saying: “We urgently need our other partners to step up their efforts.”

According to bloc data, the EU and member states have transferred more than 231 billion euros in resources to Ukraine so far.

Brussels will not tie aid plea to trade conditions

European officials emphasise that the call to increase aid does not constitute a criticism directed at Britain or Canada.

Speaking to the publication, a European diplomat said Brussels would not directly link support for Ukraine to conditions on trade or defence cooperation, adding: “The EU is not going to pull a Trump and openly make its goodwill toward partners contingent on what they give to Ukraine.”

The EU had previously taken part in a commitment to provide 90 billion euros in loans to meet roughly two thirds of Ukraine’s requirements in the 2026-2027 period.

The Brussels administration also expected to raise 45 billion euros from partners such as Canada, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and Norway, though a portion of these funds has not yet been allocated.

The government in London states that it has committed 25 billion pounds to Ukraine, while Canada has pledged military aid valued at 5.4 billion euros alongside 8.2 billion euros in direct financial support.

Emphasising that her country is an unwavering supporter of Ukraine, Privy Council of Canada spokesperson Catherine Séguin stated that they have committed roughly 26 billion Canadian dollars for military, financial, humanitarian, and development assistance.

Brussels is also urging Japan to increase its aid volume.

A source familiar with Tokyo’s position stated that Japan has provided around 20 billion dollars to Kyiv and could allocate additional funds in line with Ukraine’s request.

National Bank of Ukraine Governor Andriy Pyshnyy announced in a statement during the summer that about 200 billion dollars in direct budget financing had been provided by the West since the start of the conflict.

At the end of June, the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine calculated the country’s external financing requirements for the 2026-2029 period at 145.9 billion dollars.

Finance Minister Serhiy Marchenko stated that, despite the assistance coming from the West, the country’s financing needs continue to remain elevated.