Britain spends billions more than France on defence, so why is the French military superior?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/03/11/britain-billions-france-defence-military/
Posted by august_air_373
Britain spends billions more than France on defence, so why is the French military superior?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/03/11/britain-billions-france-defence-military/
Posted by august_air_373
31 Comments
It really depends on what aspect of military capability you’re looking at and where current investments are focused on really.
Comparing raw troop numbers or number of ships is one thing, but both militaries have been focused on totally different things (post cold war) and both are going to have to undergo some very significant changes to be ready for a near-peer conflict in the future.
Knowing the Telegraph it will be because of woke, net zero, cultural marxist remainers or some shit.
Because France develops the majority of it in house and handles their own business and buys from French companies?
Britain getting fleeced by American arms companies? Looking at the Ajax and General Dynamics there.
https://cdn.masto.host/mastodongamedevplace/media_attachments/files/109/558/817/606/961/410/small/1f9e2a839d1709d9.png
The article isn’t that convincing. It tries to underplay the french successes and say that British failures are not that bad, overlooking the abysmal performance of the conservatives tenure on the military. The UK military has a problem with procurement, and maintenance, and recruitment, that is a direct result of weak compromises from successive governments and compounds to the results today.
The article says that France only has one aircraft carrier and chances are that it would be in dry docks. What about the 4 helicopter carriers ? What about the fact that the UK still only has 1 ship available when France had 80% of its fleet ready to set sail ?
It also says that France gets a 1,3e return on military spending, like it’s an afterthought. It’s really really hard to do. It’s decades of continuous political and military cooperation. It can’t be overlooked if the UK or Europe wants to move away from vassal status to the US
When Macron said NATO was brain dead this is exactly the kind of things he was alluding to.
It’s impressive to see how much attention recent French initiatives have garnered in the British press. I don’t recall other countries comparing themselves to us to such an extent.
Britain buys over priced weapons from the USA.
Shitty procurement is my guess. The military knows what it wants and needs, but the civil service manages the procurement.
In theory, it’s supposed to lead to efficiencies since the civil service has the experience with sourcing suppliers and negotiating contracts.
But evidently it’s not worked well and, as with everything else the government does, ends up over budget and under delivered.
France: “It appears my superiority has lead to some controversy.”
The meme lives on.
Thats what you get when you actually developed matured state-owned or state-sponsored arms industry, duh. And for reason I cannot understand, France seems to be able to recruit more people into the armed forces.
The size of the budget isn’t indicative of the quality of the equipment. I can buy an excellent loaf of bread in Athens for 1 euros but in London I’d need 5 euros. It doesn’t mean that it’s 5x better because it costs 5x more.
The UK should be looking at France and taking learnings from them in both the military, and the energy sectors.
Instead, we love selling ourselves out for pennies on the pound to US and EU conglomerates.
It’s fucking sickening and should’ve been stopped 25 years ago.
France has better civil servants
France does everything in house the UK hires armies of consultants and outsources everything. I would say the French civilian procurement arm is excellent.
The British also don’t have the national pride of the French I just don’t think people in the UK care about the state of the armed forces and probably even think it’s too big.
Indeed. Why?
It’s not? The Royal navy is much larger than the French, the RAF is more advanced than the French air Force. The British army has slightly less personell but you’ll have to consult geography for why. The france-wank in this sub is crazy.
Because ministry of defence procurement is borderline corrupt and fraudulent
The British have a bigger budget but they have a huge procurement and maintenance problem that is probaly due to all the high tech american kit they buy.
France’s kit isn’t as capable on paper but it’s designed in a way that we can actualy sustain and use it.
Very simple. 2 major points;
* UK procurement (not just military) is a fucking shambles. The whole process is picked at by vulture-like consultants, and politicians cannot stick to a set of criteria for a new development project to save their lives. It’s chronic and needs to be totally ripped up and started again. The whole public sector here is essentially infantilised by the consultancy industry.
* Less domestic production – or, perhaps more accurately (given the UK is home to many of the world’s largest defence organisations), the UK’s domestic production is not geared towards scale-based delivery or start-to-finish completion and delivery of development contracts. Our arms industry largely exists as an industry that develops software and manufactures components.
French onion soup.
Efficient procurement. The DGA is a model in itself.
France and Britain spend about the same on defense, and the idea that the French military is superior is fiction. The availability of a ship doesn’t translate to superiority across the board. OP is inane.
France is living off the legacy of the 1950s-70s despite the sabotage by its own leaders and by Europe; that’s how resilient it is.
I’m not even mentioning the failed programs like Hermes, the early IT ventures, etc.
In France, there’s a famous saying: “We may not have oil, but we have ideas.”
And anti-European sentiment plays a significant role because we’ve sacrificed so much for Europe: nuclear power for the Germans, the price of blood in the fight against Islamic terrorism, our agriculture for your South American pact.
But if only, instead of F-35s where all the calculations are done in the US, you had chosen the Rafale, where all the calculations are done on the aircraft itself.
France’s vision has always been a Europe of nations rather than a federal one subservient to the US. She was alone, but even these remnants clearly show that her military, energy, etc., vision wasn’t so bad while everyone else mocked our arrogance.
Sometimes I just wish France would continue its rapprochement with India and Southeast Asia.
Guys, we’re the only ones who defended Greece against Turkey.
We refused the invasion of Iraq, but France is still paying the price in blood to fight against the Islamic State. And we’re the only independent army.
Yet we continue to undermine our energy and food self-sufficiency.
Britain is one of the best countries in the world at spending money. They’ve been at the cutting edge of spending money for centuries. Getting a return? Eh.
France uses French equipment; planes, vehicles, ships and guns.
UK buys overpriced, expensive to maintain equipment from the US.
it’s all about efficiency – spending more doesn’t mean you’re spending better.
multiple factors come into this : France makes a vast majority of its equipment in house, so it has lower prices.
but the most overlooked I think is maintenance; if you have equipment that needs longer and more frequent maintenance (and therefore less availability), that also means more costs.
and let’s not talk about forever programs like the AJAX – 6 billion down the drain.
Let me guess… It’s due to procurement and operational costs.
A foreign company will fleece you, a domestic company will sell cheap while making money on you making them pay less or no tax.
An answer very scarcely talked about is the DGA : Direction General de l’Armement.
It is the public agency tasked with procurement and public program management. They are very very good, often considered among the best on the planet.
It is a public agency broadly untouched by political and electoral chances, giving them the ability to think land plan long term. It is a prestigious place so it attracts capable people. They are very capable in project management. they allocate and lead industrial project very effectively : there has not been in France a single white elephant in decades now. All programs broadly stay on line in delays, prices and specs, which is somewhat of unheard of. They allocate their somewhat small budget very cleverly, choosing foreign procurment (rifles, light infantry véhicule) or domestic development without false note so far.
The current SCAF issue is a good example. Despite what is being said, foreign cooperation is not impossible with France. The AlphaJet, the KNDS merger, the MBT program, the Jaguar program, the rifle program, all work well. The issue is the SCAF is that the DGA (and thus France) needs a very good carrier capable nuclear capable aircraft while retaining they whole technological know how because it is just the most key asset of our armed forces (along with subs). While for others, it is a glorified police plane and buys US to compensate anyway. Dassault has consistently proposed better and cheaper design vs Airbus and affiliated, and keeping them at top level is essentiel for France security. Giving the lead to Airbus, or worse, no lead at all, would just drive cost and delays up and specs down to a level not acceptable, while degrading Dassault capabilities. Just like Germany would refuse to not give the lead of the MBT canon part to Rheinmetall. They believe that going alone will still be cheaper and better than a forced all-equal program. War isn’t some high school project where the journey is what matters, not the result.
Because it’s in pensions…
France doesn’t count military pensions into the defence budget we do.
So technically we pay far less on gear than most.
Britain has become a master in inefficiency, not only in the military, but in all sectors of society