How France’s new ballistic missile program challenges European defence unity

France has confirmed plans to pursue a billion-euro medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) programme, raising questions among defence experts and European partners about the country’s commitment to collective armament initiatives. The project, known as Missile Balistique Terrestre (MBT), will be led by ArianeGroup, the company that also manufactures France’s submarine-launched intercontinental ballistic missile. Designed to have a range of around 2,000 kilometres, the missile is expected to be manoeuvrable in its terminal phase and could potentially incorporate a hypersonic glide vehicle.

While EU member states are free to allocate defence spending as they choose, analysts note that the unilateral nature of the MBT project sits uneasily with France’s repeated calls for deeper European defence cooperation. The absence of any visible reaction from other European capitals has also surprised observers, particularly given the number of agreements Paris has signed in recent years committing to joint development of long-range strike capabilities, as observed in an article published by the Geopolitical Monitor outlet.

ArianeGroup has been in talks with the French army for nearly a year. Under current plans, France’s 2026 budget allocates €15.6 million for a feasibility study, rising to €20 million in 2027 and €44 million in 2028, before surging to €820 million through the end of 2030. The scale of investment comes at a time when France’s budget deficit is the largest since the Second World War and defence spending is unlikely to be reduced, potentially forcing difficult trade-offs.

This has prompted concern among European partners that Paris may lack the financial or political capital to sustain other joint projects aimed at developing deep precision strike (DPS) capabilities. These multinational programmes, many of them less costly and more easily mass-produced, are designed to be interoperable across land, air and sea forces and are prioritised by NATO and EU states facing a perceived Russian threat. By contrast, the MBT programme is widely viewed as a matter of national prestige and is expected to proceed regardless of foreign participation.

French military leaders themselves have also expressed reservations. Appearing before the National Defence and Armed Forces Commission on October 22, the article cites Chief of the Defence Staff General Thierry Burkhard Mandon as saying: “I think that in the future fight, the ability to reach the command posts, logistics centers, production centers, energy centers of an enemy will remain essential […] However, I remain very cautious about the strategic aspect that would suggest that a capital, in particular a nuclear power, is being dissuaded by threatening it with ballistic missiles.”

Such caution reflects lessons from recent conflicts, with the article pointing out how ballistic missiles have shown mixed effectiveness when facing modern air defences. During Iran’s June attack on Israel, around 90% of the 150 ballistic missiles launched on the first night were intercepted. In Ukraine, concentrated air defence systems have limited damage to strategic sites, while Russian Iskander-M and KN-23 missiles have had greater impact closer to the front. Analysts argue that either very large numbers of relatively simple missiles or extremely sophisticated and expensive designs are required to overcome defences that continue to improve.

Costs are also a major issue. The US Army’s Dark Eagle hypersonic weapon, which has a range comparable to an MRBM, is estimated to cost around $41 million per missile. Military journalist Chloe Anderson noted that “their launch platforms—whether underground silos, mobile trucks, or submarines—require extensive infrastructure and high readiness.” Large ground-launched missiles demand fleets of transporter-erector launchers and protective air defence systems, further increasing expense and complexity.

Another point of consideration is how size and weight will limit the flexibility of its wider implementation. China’s DF-21D anti-ship MRBM, for example, weighs nearly 15 tonnes, making it incompatible with European fighter aircraft and difficult to integrate into existing French naval launch systems. French parliamentary discussions have already confirmed that future frigates will expand vertical launch capacity, but an MRBM would not fit those launchers.

Even staunch supporters of the MBT project in France’s National Assembly acknowledge these challenges. In a report backing the programme, deputies Matthieu Bloch and Jean-Louis Thiériot warned that “exclusive French procurement of a long-range ballistic missile system risks producing prohibitively expensive unit costs, potentially limiting stocks to strategically significant missions rather than enabling operational-level employment.”

Meanwhile, France remains committed on paper to multilateral initiatives. Over the past year, Paris has signed cooperation agreements with Poland, the UK and Germany, all tied to the European Long Range Strike Approach (ELSA). Formed in 2024, ELSA aims to reduce European reliance on US strike capabilities.

Yet analysts such as Timothy Wright of the International Institute for Strategic Studies argue that developing an affordable, scalable system under ELSA may be incompatible with a costly, nationally focused ballistic missile effort.

As France presses ahead with MBT, its European partners will be watching closely to see whether Paris can reconcile national ambition with collective defence commitments.

By Nazrin Sadigova