Theorycrafting, obviously. Generally the first question would have to be ‘what do our armed forces need to be able to do?’.

**Assumptions: **all already planned procurements do continue. Belgium has a GDP of about 644.8 billion €. We were at about 1.3% of GDP spent on military.
Let’s assume we’ll have to increase well beyond 2%, to around 2.5-2.6% due to recent events. (In my opinion, 3-3.5% is not needed either).

In general, from a military budget, about 20-30% goes to procurement. For thought experiment, I take the GDP above, take 1.3% (the doubling of defense budget), x 10 for the next 10 years, x 30% (at least 30% of new budget should go to procurement.
I arrive at **25 billion € for acquisitions over the next 10 years. **

What could Belgium acquire for this money, from EU?

I’d say Electronic Warfare & Cyber defense can easily eat 1-2 billion right from the start.
Our defense minister wants to buy more F35’s, I’d rather not.
I’m also not convinced an extra frigate (quite large for us) makes sense.
Note that Belgium is extremely risk-averse when it comes to military casualties.

Naval option :
Dutch submarines. 2 ships. At approx 1.5 billion each, that comes to 3 billion. Belgium operates in close co-operation with the Dutch navy. The new Dutch submarines will be fewer (4 ships) due to high cost.

An extra patrol vessel: 30 ish million. Relatively ‘peanuts’.

2x new European patrol corvettes. (combat variant?) Estimated at 300 million each, for 600 million.

The above pushes 3.63 billion towards the navy, let’s round it out to 4 (guaranteed in practice the price will tend to go up). Less than 20% (but there will need to be support budget of course also, this is just looking at procurement).
Corvettes & Minesweepers are maintained in Belgium.
Frigates in the Netherlands, and so would the submarines need to be as Belgium has no experience in this area.


The Belgian land army. Poor sods.
Current: Nothing with tracks. Little artillery just recently. Manpads for anti-air.

a heavy mechanized brigade with artillery and anti-air support seems like a bare minimum for the economical size of Belgium. (nr 7 in EU!).
The Griffons are too lightly armed for the frontline.

This would require at least about 120 IFV’s. Ideally with the 40mm CTA as the Jaguar has.
And 60 Main Battle tanks, if we want this capability.
Because we are coming from 0, and we are not sure what capability will be needed, I’m going to assume an oversized brigade.

120 Wheeled IFV’s. Options include: VCBI2, the Patria AMV (with a 40mm CTA turret to be developped), and others.
120 at approx 5 million/unit = 600 million €.

120 Tracked IFV’s. Examples the CV90, the South-Korean K21 (Redback for Australia, and I believe Polish ), the Lynx, and others.
We’ll assume a cost of about 8 million/unit. 120 x 8= 960 million €. Round it to 1 billion.

60 Tanks, about 15 million each. 90 million.
60 other ‘gun platforms’. These could be wheeled, to make a ‘wheeled sub-brigade’ or lighter tracked vehicles for max mobility. We’ll count these as 10 million each, for 60 million.

Anti-air: both short range and medium-long range anti-air would be needed.
The 40mm CTA cannon might serve. If not, the 30 or 35mm ‘oerlikon’.
Then, there are the various CAMM-based, Iris-T based, and/or Aster based options.

2 SAMP/T batteries would run about 1.5 billion.
But this would just be for the brigade. 4 batteries for Belgium seems a minimum to me, given the airports, Brussels, the naval ports,…
So: a casual 3 billion.
We’ll add in an assumed cost of 1.5 billion on various short(er) range weapons.

Artillery: Caesars, let’s assume 8 million per unit.
2x8 would be 8x16 million = 128 million.

1 rocket artillery battery. If using the Chung Moo system, assume about 150 million cost.

Various support vehicles: if it can be done by a Griffon, use a Griffon, we’re buying 100’s of them already.
Still, towing capability, engineering vehicles (de-mining!), command & control, communication,…

Let’s round it to an extra 500 million-1 billion of ‘varia’.

This mechanized brigade would cost (vehicles only):
600 mill (wheeled IFV’s)
1.000 mill (tracked IFV’s)
90 mill (tanks, absolute minimum nr) 60 mill (wheeled gun platforms)
4.500 mill for anti-air (includes 2 batteries for Belgium territory)
128 million gun-artillery
150 million rocket artillery
750 million ‘support’ of all kinds.

Sum: 7.3 billion approximately.

So:
25 billion

  • 2 billion on Electronic Warfare & cyber
  • 4 billion to the navy
  • 7.3 billion to the land force.

Still leaves 11.7 billion in leftovers.

Of course, there will need to be infantry equipment, munitions, and so fort.
But that is quite a royal sum.

We’ll say we can freely use half of the leftover, about 6 billion, on a bit of a splurge.

Drones
drones everywhere.
3 billion worth (including weapons)
After FCAS/GCAP are fully developped, the air force would once again get a bigger share of the funding at that point, and get even more drones.

Long range missiles
a la Long Range Hypersonic Weapon.
We’ll say we develop a European one, with a 50 mill € unit cost.
For 3 billion, Belgium could buy 60.
That’s a significant capability to casually add.
Even at 100 mill per unit, it’d be 30.
If other European countries would do the same (we cannot fund such missile alone…), Europe would reach into the high hundreds, if not thousands of such missiles.
Deterrence achieved I’d say.
Bit of a role-swap with Russia whom tends to have historically, missile superiority, a bit of a copy from China (oh my, how the turn tables…), I’d rate such capability of having a (modest) missile stockpile, above adding an extra 8 F35’s. (the planes cost 80-ish million, but that doesn’t include weapons, and they need pilots etc).

I’d love to read alternate takes on a hypothetical Belgian (or your local countries’) military buying spree.

  • Ben Matthews
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Belgian here, and I think all such specific options are wrong.
    Any big equipment ordered now would quickly become obsolete, look how drones (both air and sea) evolved just during the last couple of years. Next problem may be countering crawling robots controlled by AI. Meanwhile heavy expensive stuff carrying people becomes relatively inefficient. So what any country needs is multifunctional adaptable factories and teams - capacity to make new equipment quickly, as needed.

    The geopolitical situation will also evolve long before any equipment ordered now is ready. And how that evolves depends especially on defence against misinformation. Addressing gaps opened in development aid also influences the geopolitical balance. A smaller ‘diplomatic’ country might play an outsized role in these domains.
    If military threats can be reduced, multifunctional factories should be capable to make technically-related equipment to tackle multiple non-military threats including “natural” disasters - such as floods or forest-fires, there was already discussion of a need for european rapid-response teams for such purposes. Build capacity for manufacturing both swords and ploughshares together. This could also gain more sustained cross-society support, and keep personnel actively trained. Building multifunctional capacity rather than stockpiles also avoids driving future leaders to enter conflicts to justify the “investment” (arguably a factor behind this war of Russia, as well as earlier US-led wars).

    As for paying US for F35s (which keep whizzing above my head, my dog chases them away…) - crazy waste of money, if as demonstrated last week any mad president in Washington can just switch them off (or refuse to update codes, software etc. - same effect in just a few weeks).

    • Auzor@feddit.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Yes & No.
      There is still vehicle combat going on.
      Note I did list 3 billion, over 10% of entire procurement, for drones. 0 extra manned aircraft. For reference, if a F35 is 100 million, 35 planes comes to 3.5 billion. (does not include maintenance, pilots, various weaponry etc).
      With the mention that after 10 years, this would go up.
      But the jury is out on what type & capability of drones we as Belgium would be willing to ‘mass up’ on.

      There is a latency in the EU on actually massing drones.
      There is political oppossition to high degree of autonomy on lethal weapons.
      At some point however, there is a strong cross-over between an Air-to-Air missile homing in on radar signature, a missile with ‘lock on after launch’ capability using a thermal imaging system, and a drone with a camera.

      The 40mm CTA cannon has a significant airburst (and penetration) capability. Whilst having approx the same number of rounds as a 30mm cannon carried. So I’d hope it’d be quite capable vs the current drones (with sensors to actually target drones).
      Modern vehicles should also increasingly be equipped with active protection systems that include countering drones.

      What we are currently seeing is that it is very difficult to acquire hi-tech kit once a conflict is already happening. ‘you fight with what you have’. Not to mention training.
      At EU & Nato level, it also simply won’t be accepted for Belgium to just not have ‘front line’ units. (‘don’t worry guys, we’ll play airport police’ is not going to fly anymore)

      I also used ‘only’ (heh) 30% of a hypothetical budget doubling.
      There should still be R&D and infrastructure setup going on.
      But I think it’ll take another 10 years to truly accept the new drone reality and have a doctrinal implementation ready.
      3 billion extra for drones in the mean time is not peanuts.
      The GCAP is at least 10 years away. The FCAS is for 2040’s (and imo, after 2045), but might see a high-capability drone earlier.

      What we should avoid in the meantime is more light infantry (= drone targets), lack of anti-air (4.5 billion in above proposal set aside for pure anti-air), buying more American kit (bad Theo! sit!), and buying very diverse/low numerical kit with different ammunition. (I’d hope Belgium can ‘standardize’ on the 40mm CTA now, and produce our own ammo. In fact, I’d be in favor of moving away from the 40mm Bofors for our ships to this gun, change our 30mm to this gun etc.)

      Likewise, I’d hope the EU tank project sees a Leopard 2 successor become the ‘default European’ tank.
      Currently this is not reaally the case for IFV’s, but the CV90, Boxer, and Patria AMV all have multiple users at least.