Germany has taken charge of NATO’s very high-readiness military force, with thousands of troops ready to deploy within days.
This force, called the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF), was created in 2014 as part of a strengthened NATO response following Russia’s annexation of Crimea.
France led the force in 2022, and Germany is taking over this year. In February of this year, NATO deployed elements of the VJTF to Romania for the unit’s first-ever collective-defence mission in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
“Germany is an important Ally and we thank Germany for leading the VJTF in 2023”, said NATO Spokesperson Oana Lungescu.
“As Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine continues to threaten peace and security in Europe, there must be no doubt about NATO’s resolve to protect and defend every inch of Allied territory. The VJTF is NATO’s first responder and a key part of our collective defence. Germany’s leadership is a strong display of its commitment and capabilities.”
The VJTF is the highest readiness element of NATO’s Response Force, and the leadership and membership rotate annually among allies. This year, the VJTF land forces will comprise around 11,500 troops, with the Panzergrenadierbrigade 37 at its core.
Nine NATO allies – Belgium, Czechia, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia – will contribute.
Some of the major units include Germany’s Panzerbataillon 393, Artillerielehrbataillon 345, Versorgungsbataillon 131, and Transporthubschrauberregiment 30. Germany will also lead the VJTF’s designated special forces command for the first time.
Surely headline should be
‘Broom stick manufactures receive major boost….’
Joking apart, has the parsimonious spares problem been resolved: so the Germans are combat effective?
It was know to be a real problem for German Eurofighters…..
SB wrote:
“”Joking apart, has the parsimonious spares problem been resolved: so the Germans are combat effective?””
Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer who replaced Ursula von der Leyen as defence minister in 2019 was a breath of fresh air for the German military and in office rectified a lot of the issues that came about during the tenue of VDL (Note she left office last month)
VDL has always been viewed as an incompetent manager.
Which is why she is where she is…..
The Eurocracy doesn’t like competent figure heads….
Lets hope they have riflles not broom sticks
Peter wrote:
Oh i dont know, as Angela Lansbury had no problem using one to great effect in which to defeat the Nazis
Well, the problems are not resolved, for example, just recently some Puma tanks encountered problems and were replaced by Marders.
However, generally take the negative press with a grain of salt – this is also used politically. If you look on ADSB global, you see quite a lot of German fighter planes training daily at the same time (yesterday, I counted 13 planes, and those are only those you see).
So, I believe the VJTF is combat ready and should not be underestimated.
With more on the way it appears plus the Heckler & Koch’s HK416A8 as its broomstick replacement!
“The German parliament has given the green light for the acquisition of 35 F-35A fighters for a total of €10 billion. The first six aircraft are expected in 2026.
After considering the Eurofighter Typhoon or the F/A-18 Super Hornet as potential successors, the lack of certification of those aircraft to carry the B61 nuclear bomb eventually forced the German government to settle for the F-35.
Germany is also jointly developing with France and Spain a replacement for the Typhoon. Known as the Future Combat Air System, the program sees Dassault Aviation and Airbus collaborating with other European manufacturers to develop a “system of systems” around the Next Generation Fighter (NGF), a sixth-generation fighter jet.”
What’s on the shopping list?
Having used the HK416 in Afghan, I think I’d be right in saying it would be the ideal replacement for the L85. Much better ergonomics and lighter. But you must get the long barrel version to have the same accuracy as the L85. Something the Yanks couldn’t understand, when we were giving effective fire out to 400m whilst they were in the 300m bracket with their M4s.
The US basically made sure that the Typhoon would not be able to carry the B61, as the integration cost apparently were huge. The US Navy have cleared the Hornet to carry nukes. But it is not as good as a Typhoon and I think those in the Airforce made the case not to get it. But oh look, we have the F35 that is newly qualified, how about that instead?
I think France will push through the FCAS, regardless of Germany or Spain. As it’s a National Pride thing, even if the cost near breaks them.
Crazy that the Germans are already having to replace the G36. Remember when the G36 was the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Meanwhile the SA80 and M16 derivatives still going strong and now the G36 is being replaced by an M16 derivative.
The US Army just adopted the M-5 with a 600m range as its new assault rifle. Along with the need for a more lethal caliber ammunition, increased range was the other primary reason for the adoption of a new standard assault rifle. Your comment about the Yanks not seeing the need for increased range is just inaccurate, along with your comment about the Typhoon and nuclear certification.
Sorry bud, but you miss interpreted the context of my comment. Which is to untrained eyes the L85 is very short, so its barrel length must be too!
The M4 has a barrel length of 14.5” whereas the L85 is 20.4” long. Which is slightly longer than the M16A2 at 20” long. This is why the L85 can put down more effective fire out to 400m better than the M4.
When using the M4 in an urban environment, it works really well. As it’s lighter weight, shorter length and good ergonomics, makes it much handier when clearing buildings. However, Afghan in particular showed that the harassing fire from the Taliban was further than the effective range of the M4. As the Taliban were using the 7.62×39 round, fired from the AK, SKS and PK, which has a longer reach, even though it is highly inaccurate past 300m.
The US Army wanted longer reach, so they’ve opted for the 6.8×51. It has the same effective range as the larger 7.62×51 NATO. So far only the US Army are looking at this round. We elected to go with the Designated marksman using the 7.62 NATO instead.
The German Airforce through Airbus/Eurofighter tried to get the Typhoon (EF2000) certified and integrated for the B61. But this was canceled due to the inordinately high cost.
They were going to order a greater number of Tranche 4 Typhoons as a replacement for their Tornados. But as that option was no longer available, they looked at the Super Hornet. But for a Hornet to get through multilayered air defenses it would need help. Hence the reason for also looking at the Growler version.
However, the German Airforce believe the Hornet to be not as good as the Typhoon. Which why when the US announced that the F35 was being cleared for the B61. They dropped the Hornet and ordered it instead. The F35 brings significantly more capability to the party besides being able to drop a bucket of instant sunshine. Which is also why the French are a bit pissed about it.
And with TR-3 happening this year I wonder when it will be cleared to carry the B61.
The new German electronic attack version of Typhoon looks promising too. In service from 2028, I understand.
Some of the ECR systems are going to be used in the Praetorian 2 upgrade. It’ll be good for the RAF too.
👍Digital stealth, the future!
Yup but F35 is also stealthy which would be quite useful in getting to and away from dropping a bucket of instant sunshine.
Agree,
It is insane that they have access to a stealthy bomber able to internally carry nuclear weapons for a price cheaper than any other combat aircraft that’s completely interoperable with all their Allie’s and they were thinking not to use it.
Putting B61 on Typhoon is a dumb idea.
You can understand Germany’s thoughts behind going down the Typhoon route. By only having one fleet of main combat aircraft, easier training, maintenance and logistics adds up to less costs.
Can’t disagree with that. Even on its own would still stand a better chance of making it home, compared to a Hornet/Growler strike package.
UK Army is down to head up the next rotation. Rumour has it that they have asked for a 3 month delay for UK units /extension for the German units. Reason being the UK Army cannot field the required units especially in Arty…Not enough serviceable AS90s.
Everything else should apparently be OK as there are enough CH2 and Warriors serviceable to meet the force needs. That said Warrior will be doing everything because its now the Recce vehicle of choice, that choice being Hobsons!
If I remember correctly when Warrior was being developed. GKN had designed a proper recce version, that had a lower hull, and did away with the rear pax space. I think I saw a model of it in the sheds at Shrivenham. But I believe the Army went down the Tracer route for what good it did, then binned that as well!
From listening to the feeds coming out of Ukraine, they are liking the Scimitars. But not in a recce role. It seems they are using them more on thunder runs and shooting up rear echelons and ammo/fuel stores. Then speeding back to safety.
True light cavalry in spirit and effect. Slava Ukraine.
Interesting. What are the UKRs using for a recce vehicle then?
The UK Army since WW2 appears to have placed less emphasis on artillery, which is surprising considering how important it was in many battles, especially in North Africa. Around 179 AS90’s were built exclusively for the UK but have been savaged in subsequent defence cuts to around 50 units (pure guess), which makes no sense at all. I can’t see the situation improving much going forward apart from buying around 60 Korean SP guns, which is a sad reflection on the UK’s ability to manufacture heavy armour. The engineering centre that designed MBTs and such is now a film studio and responsible for making ‘Call The Midwife’ instead……..enough said!
You have to remember that the average British General went to some toffy private school and worked his way up through either the paras or some 400 year old foot soldier regiment that started off with long bows and has spent his entire career walking around mountains in Central Asia chasing insurgents and when they were back in the UK trying to keep as many cap badges as possible.
These were the people sending men out in open top land rovers. The lack of artillery is hardly surprising and the shitty specs and ineffective caliber on the AS90 barrel is much the same reason C2 has a 120mm rifled gun.
Then it’s always “blame the politicians” like any politicians every took a decision on anything like this.
Thank f**k you need more qualifications to sail a boat or fly and plane which is why the RAF and RN are in a much better state.
Class is more noticeable in the Army than in the other two services and it is rumoured that the dimmest of the sons went into the army. Whether this is the reason the Army is in a sad state is debatable and to be fair, it’s the chrome-plated incompetence of the manufacturers that have led to the Ajax and Warrior update debacle. As for artillery, we do need more guns as the Ukrainian war has demonstrated the effectiveness of these weapons. Surely, someone in the MOD is attempting to improve the balance of field weapons to ensure the Army can function in the coming years regardless of, ‘Tim Nice But Dim!’
I was four years in the OTC and can confirm that 😀
In all seriousness though so much of the civil service around development and procurement has been outsourced or privatised I don’t think there are many out of uniform to lead decisions and often those in uniform are not best placed to lead such things.
I remember once attending an Army demonstration with heavy armour, which was open to the public and I was amazed talking to some officers just how little they knew about the vehicles taking part. One chap said, ‘Bloody hell you know more than me and I’m organising this show!’ Enough said I think?
Maurice, I think that your outlook and Jim’s is very out of date. All comments seem to be based on rumours.
I sent to Sandhurst from a comprehensive school in 1975 – Mum was working class and Dad was lower middle – I was not the only one – now over half some from state schools. Granted that the Cav and the Guards and those from the better line infantry regiments had the upmarket background, but these are niche parts of the army.
Dim? A huge number of those going to Sandhurst today have degrees and others such as REME often do their degrees later, in-service. I never served under a dim officer in my 34 years in the army. Many officers go into top jobs in civvy street on leaving – dim chaps wouldn’t stand a chance.
Many reasons for terrible procurment of army kit, especially AFVs. Blame should go around quite widely as you say, and include Industry, Civil Servants, some MoD politicians and the Treasury.
I believe Jim’s view is a little more jaundiced than mine though, there is some evidence of ‘dim.’ The majority of our forces are smart and bloody good at what they do. God bless them.
Maurice, I am not sure what your evidence is about dim senior army officers, we’ll agree to disagree!
25% of the army in WW2 was RA. Its now about 9%.
We should ask the politicians why they force defence cuts (and so frequently) when they say that the defence of the nation is a Government’s No. 1 priority.
I worked at RARDE Chertsey in the Unmanned Vheicles Div – we did some cutting edge work there – and were about 15 years ahead of civvy Industry’s R&D. My Mess was Barrowhills, now HQ for the film studio.
Maybe we should donate as much of our older armour and artillery as required to the Ukraine, even if it means we have to rebuild with Ajax ( I hope ); Boxer and new artillery. We need to design an army equipped to do what we want it to do in the future and not play around with what it has been before.
Lead time for parts out of manufacture can be long , three months out to tender then you have to wait for slot in suppliers manufacturing program. This is due to low numbers which do not generate much profit . If the part is not made to drawing the processes may have to start again. The only solution is the armed forces to have its own engineering company to make some parts, this is against the modern lean” just in time ethos” which clearly has never worked. Parts are not quality checked for conformity when entering stores system as considered old fashioned and expensive which leads to long delays if incorrectly made.
K2 Black Panther. In serial production now. Order by Poland. 180, in 1st batch for delivery by end 2024. They’ve already received 20-30. Difficult to get precise numbers as it’s obviously very sensitive info just how many K2s are already in Poland.
Follow on large scale production in Poland of 880+ indigenously produced K2s all in service by 2028 I think. The British army could order 400+ K2s. Rebuild it’s heavy armour around the class and have one of the most modern MBTs in service. Crucially with an active protection system on all of them vs just 68 sets for C3.
I’d order K2s with UK production a requirement. Which the South Koreans were happy to do for Poland and Turkey (Atlay MBT is basically a K2). That way we retain the ability to produce MBTs and get technology transfer. Win/win. C3 upgrades are a blind alley. The type is going nowhere. I’d give them all to Ukraine and replace with K2s.
Sure the Challenger is an excellent defensive MBT but without an APS it remains to be seen if it has any chance of survival on a modern battleground.
We may retain MBT capability to build, but lose the ability to design. For me, the Army needs to have a purpose built Tank along the line of ensuring there’s an export version available. I suspect that when looking around, the 3 favourites will be the Abram 3, Leopard 2 and K2? By not upgrading or design/build from new in 2016, we are out of the purchase cycle. The UK really is dropping like a stone when it comes to military capability. It OK having ICBM’s, but their use is unthinkable, so the budget spent on them cannot be spent on other products.
Lets face it, with the end of the Cold War and the Troubles, the UK has just cut too much. It’s alright saying “we can’t afford it”. Did Ukraine afford Russia’s invasion, did nuclear weapons stop Afghanistan, Iraq or the Falklands from happening? Budgets at home need to be cut and before anyone says “what”, we all know where there’s plenty of waste.
Challenger is a defensive tank? CR2 (and before it, CR1) has always been used offensively.
You can’t give CR3 to Ukraine – they haven’t been built yet.
If British Army are to head next rotation, why on earth aren’t they participating in this one to ‘get their eye in?
The only force in Europe that matters is the U.S. This is just politics. I cannot speak for the Baltic States, but I estimate the only western European country in the frontline truly willing to fight would be Finland.
I would maybe expand that by saying previously occupied countries of the former Warsaw Pact would be willing to fight as well…
The way Poland is gearing up I think they have it in mind to sort the Russians by themselves if they have to.
That would turn to “buckets of sunshine” from the Russians very quickly!
But then you have to deliver the sunshine bucket.
Imagine how humiliating it would be if the sunshine bucket was interdicted or failed to work.
Then China would walk into Russia.
Poland isn’t interested in invading Russia or taking any Russian lands. Poland is getting richer as a part of the EU and doesn’t need a 2nd/3rd world country that is going backwards which would being all of the problems of German reunification with it and no obvious tangible benefits.
However, Poland doesn’t want any unwanted visitors and having seen what was done to Ukraine and what was done to Poland in WW2 is making good and sure it won’t happen there.
Absolutely agree with your analysis Mr S.B.
👍
Agree, how the Poles suffered. All strength to them.
Perhaps Poland might like to recover the lands it lost to the USSR at the end of WW2 – if the gloves really come off.
[Only joking]
The Ukrainians & Lithuanians wouldn’t like that, & I think grabbing the capital city of a NATO ally wouldn’t be popular anywhere except Moscow.
They’ve got themselves 700 Howitzers and 100 MLRS apparently.
Any evidence to support that?
Realities, dear Jim. The United States has more of everything. The defence of western Europe depends upon it. It is good politics to have these ‘European’ assemblies, but let us not go too far in believing it to be anymore than a display. Re-call if you would, the response of France and Germany to Russia’s assault on Ukraine last February and how long that stupefaction lasted.
There are 1.8 million full time military personnel in European NATO and the only country that can threaten them geographically is Russia. Russia has less men and less of everything than European NATO (except sunshine buckets)
So why do you think those 1.8 million European personnel can’t defeat the Russians?
Do you have anything to back up that assertion?
Not wishing to be tedious, please read your own comments. You answered this question yourself elsewhere on the thread where you dumped Germany, Europe’s most successful economy and advanced society, out of contention to lead N.A.T.O. The issue is not numbers – numbers are not a defining part of war (see France 1940 for a recent example; or, Gaugamela for an ancient one). However, Ukraine demonstrates two things that are real and observable. Russia is not a super power any longer, if ever; the United States is and that is why Putin is failing.
Given Biden’s weakness in the Kabul debacle, has he got the grit to commit to warfighting in Europe if the s**t hits the fan.
I did not predict success, merely that all the significant military power all Europeans depend upon today and for a considerable period to come, is that of the U.S.
Yes, agreed. We depend on the US if warfighting between NATO and Russia ever happens.
I don’t think the Poles would stand by and roll over if Russia arracks. Of all the countries in NATO they are the ones who are really up-arming.
316 M1 A1/A2 MBT
247 Leopard 2 MBT
1000 K2 Black Panther MBT
200 Krab 155 SP
672 K9 Thunder 155 SP
And that is just Army, which will mean Poland will have the largest and best equipped Army in Europe.
Anyone who knows a Pole just ask them what they think of Russia and stand well back.
The Poles have nothing to prove to me; however, when the U.S. President telephones his European clients and tells them he has made a deal over their heads, what then? You see where this is coming from. Ukraine is heroic. Ukraine is widely admired (in the shrinking west, less so elsewhere than we would like to imagine). Ukraine is also being pummelled. The United States is crucial to the defence of ‘Europe’ and it is a fantasy to believe it isn’t. Oh, people might go down with a fight, but today they aren’t facing that outcome and they have a lot to lose and are a lot closer to Russia than Blighty.
I can think of at least one other country that Poland have a dislike for. Belive me I married to a third gen in the UK polish lass and all her polish relations have the same view. The Polish have been hard done by over many years and they are a very proud (quite rightly) nation with a can do attitude. They are natural fighters with broom sticks or modern kit. believe you me.
Soon the only force that will matter in Europe will be the formidable Polish army. They are about to surpass even US land power in Europe. Taking the defence of their realm very seriously. Unlike our current joke of a government.
I admire the Poles. But what about the rest? Frankly, the only player in the European sphere we have to rely upon is the U.S. We all had better hope the U.S. political leadership improves dramatically and soon.
What!? Why would only Finland be willing to fight? I would add the UK, Estonia and Poland for starters. Of course if Article V is called, all in NATO are required to step up.
They would fight but for how long and to what end? Reality is your friend, not something to avoid. Article five rather confirms my point. It only amounts to anything because it brings in the military resources of the one and only super power on Europe’s behalf.
Back in my BAOR days I had no doubt that all national contingents with troops stationed in Germany would fight if the Warsaw Pact rolled westwards across the IGB.
Clearly times have changed if, as you say, nearly all European NATO nations would not fight or not fight for long. That is incredibly disturbing.
When the Polish defence force gets to be better than the French – watch out for fireworks of all sorts.
What’s the chances the Germans would actually allow this unit to be deployed on anything other than a peace keeping type role. There is no space left in NATO for neutrals and given Germanys track record in the likes of Afghanistan it should not be allowed to participate as the lead element of such forces giving it an effective Veto in their deployment.
Such roles should be limited to the USA, France and the UK with maybe Poland Canada or Italy playing a role as lead.
I don’t mean any disrespect to the Germans or the German people but their attitude is still very much that of being a neutral country, they have the capability to do this role but lack the will. It’s important to move NATO away from the peace keeping or security mission outlook it did have and get it back to the mindset of fighting full scale wars against Russia and China.
The Germans are too politically compromised to play much of a role against either.
I think the main reason for the political reluctance is that they’re nationally compromised, due to their past, which has sunk into the national psyche.
And that is understandable.
I think, like Japan, they will recover and take their place amongst militarilly active nations once again. I hope they do anyway.
I think Poland will take their spot in NATO TBH.
Poland are exposed and want to support and drive a strong NATO as do the Nordics.
Agree, the Baltics and Poland are reliable.
It’s a common thread that they like to hide behind and if they want to continue to act like that then they should relinquish any form of leadership as they are neither willing or capable and will hold everyone else back which may be their aim.
I think their willingness to work with the Russians right up until and even after the invasion on Nord stream 2 and their continued full hearted support for the CCP shows where their real cards lie.
I see very little “moral” about Germans foreign policy, it’s as mercantile as its economic policy. It’s basically “Germany First” but keep it quiet and act like your doing everyone a favour.
Jim, a bit unkind that.
I think that you will find that the Germans did deploy to Afghanistan, and also lost a lot of people while over there. Sure they weren’t in Helmand or Kandahar, but they did have a large presence and were there from relatively early on in the conflict.
Yes they deployed into specifically peace keeping roles and they look at things like the NATO VJTF as a peace keeping or security assistance type force which they would be fine to provide but things have moved on and if we need it to say the Sulwaki Gap you can guarantee the Germans won’t allow it to go.
The Germans have provided forces for Kosovo or security assistance in Afghanistan but things have changed but their mind set has not, that’s why they should step back from leadership roles in NATO.
The Germans are the lead for the Lithuanian EFP.
So, that being the case, who should in your opinion be allowed fill said leadership roles within NATO, and what criteria would you use to support those choices?
We have for a very long time, been the lead country for the ARRC, yet you might argue that we couldn’t really deploy a division within its ranks. Why have we held this top slot for so long, if others can supply more men/equipment?
Personally I have no idea what criteria is used to invite countries to the top jobs even if on a rotational basis.
Afghanistan was not peace-keeping.
Give it to the Latvians. We’d be in Vladivostock by March; the Poles are in a queue when it comes to giving the orcs a good kicking.
Let’s see how serious Germany actually is. This could open up the floodgates for other nations to join in and do the exact same thing. 🙏
Poland planning to send tanks to Ukraine
“In a significant step-up of support for Ukraine, Poland has decided to send Leopard tanks to its neighbour.
Polish President Andrzej Duda said a company of the German-made tanks – usually meaning 14 vehicles – would be handed over.
Poland previously said it would only send over the Leopard 2 tanks as part of a broader international coalition, and Mr Duda said today that he hoped the Polish tanks would join those from other countries in being sent to Ukraine.
Speaking alongside Mr Duda, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said a joint decision was necessary as one country would not be able to provide Ukraine with enough tanks.
Any re-export of the Leopard tanks will require approval by the German government – and earlier, a spokesperson for Berlin said they were not aware of any requests from allies to send the battle tanks to Ukraine.”
It’s a start. 14 leopard 2s from Poland. 10 C2s from UK. Do we have any C1s or Chieftains lying around we could refurb and give to Ukraine. Even those older models would prove terminally effective against Putin’s rust bucket armoured forces.
Shows the folly of scrapping everything rather than placing hardware into reserve.
Cheiftans are very old keeping them would be too costly for little benefit. Cr1s were sold off to Jordan.
386 CR2s were built for the army and 336 were in use in 2010. Obviously there were cuts after but I think quite a lot are in recoverable condition in storage. It would probably be quite a bit of work to restore them but I don’t see us building our own tanks any time soon.
And much needed, Ukraine is slowly being decimated by Russia. Clearly, we need to do much more, sooner rather than later.
We don’t keep equipment that has been declared Obsolete – it costs too much and we don’t have the storage and they may have little miitary effectiveness against more modern opponents.
We scrapped half the Chieftains in the mid-80s once CR1 was fielded and the other half in the late 90s when CR2 was fielded.
We sold nearly all of the CR1s to Jordan twenty years ago.
We should instead consider supplying more CR2s than the 12 announced today.
Makes sense, the least ready military in Europe to head up the High Readiness force.
Since this is a sort of German thread, has the German Govt preventing their NATO allies sending Leopards to Ukraine given us any worries about using a German replacement gun on Challenger II Mark 2?
Or is that allayed since it relates to exports, not how we use them ourselves?
(Suspect it is good for the future of the Korea-tech supplied future Polish tank industry, though.)
Thoughts followed from this inspector-of-squirrels interview by Ralf Stegner, parliamentary leader of the German Social Democrats:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHmDe08SqsM
I would have thought leading a high readiness force would require leadership and readiness…
First time I’ve heard of Germany and readiness being used together. lol
Given Germanys current refusal to allow Leopard 2 tanks to be passed to Ukraine by countries which have purchased them, and the critical importance attached to that decision, should Getmany really be in charge of anything? With the best will in the world, I honestly think not
Not sure about any German leadership given their prelidiction for inaction.Ukraians are now waiting for German tanks.Schultz sits onhis hands due to his love for German Russo detent.
Bit awkward that if we have to deploy.Legitimate to wonder if the German authorities are so eastward looking as to not be a part of Nato or the European response
The Germany is also leading the EU battlegroup in Ulm for 2024-2025. Looks to be a size of 5.000 personnel.
A BG is not 5,000 personnel – that is a brigade size.
Saw this here. Looks like the EU BG are to be bigger.
https://www.vindobona.org/article/planning-conference-eu-battlegroup-2025-in-vienna-strengthening-common-security-and-defense-policy
Strategic compass
The EU Battlegroup is of particular importance as the individual building blocks of a joint EU intervention force. Starting in 2023, joint exercises and training are to take place, and by 2025 the force is to be fully operational. In March 2022, the European Union’s “Strategic Compass” was adopted for this purpose, which defines the security policy ambition and envisages a joint deployment of up to 5,000 soldiers.
Thanks Mickey. Clearly the EU politicians don’t know what a Battlegroup is. Perhaps they shouldn’t be playing with Defence matters and leave it up to those who know the subject! Leaving my grumbling aside, this is a multinational brigade, not a BG. It is also a very small force for 10 European nations to put together. The French and Germans alone put together ‘the EuroCorps’ a few years back.