Another Military Advantage the US has over the EU.
Yes, my piece about the problems of modern military procurement is far, far, far behind schedule. Blame it on my job search. But the British newspaper The Daily Telegraph has an article today which talks about how the British military is searching for more roll-on/roll-off vehicle transporters to contract so they can help move the expected forces the UK will deploy to the Middle East for the coming action against Iraq. The article also contained the surprising news that both France and Holland have been also in the market for ro/ro ships, perhaps the clearest signal that even in Europe, countries are falling in line behind the US for a military action against Iraq.
While the US military have also been contracting ships to help move forces and material, the US is in far, far better shape sealift-wise then it was in 1991 during the run-up to the last Gulf War. Then, US efforts at mobilizing the mothballed transports of the National Reserve Defense Fleet to move equipment from the US to Saudi Arabia was a disaster in every sense of the word. Old ships (Some dating back to the World War Two period.) which were too far gone in condition to use, vessels that should have been ready to steam from within a few days to a month after the start of mobilization requiring additional weeks and/or months of work to be in condition to go to sea, ships breaking down a few day to just a few hours after leaving Savannah carrying heavy equipment and supplies, and the general state of disrepair that the entire US merchant marine suffers from - it was a good thing the world shipping market was there to support Desert Shield/Desert Storm. Of course, foreign ships being charted to carry American military cargo presented their own problems - one charted freighter carrying explosives needed to be unloaded on the Mediterranean side of the Suez Canal - with the cargo shipped overland to the Red Sea and reload to continue the journey to Saudi Arabia - because one of the ship's officers was a Libyan and it was feared the ship might be scuttled in the canal and block maritime traffic completely.
In the decade since those experiences, the US has added 2 million tons of ships to its sealift fleet, one of the few good things to happen to national defense under President Clinton, vastly improving the age, condition, carrying capacity, and numbers of the transport pool. While there is no new ships like the SL-7s (Big vehicle transports capable of extrardinary 30+ knots speeds, originally contracted to be built for the SeaLand shipping line. The US, under the auspices of the young Transportation Command, owns and operate - with civilian crews - all eight ships in the class.), most have been big vehicle transports with pretty good speed and endurance. Some, like the Bob Hope-class, are new-built. Others have been purchased and refitted to American standards, including ships built in the Ukraine. Airlift-wise, the US has a smaller pool of long-range, heavy-lift military transport aircrafts then in 1991. However, most of the C-5A/Bs (The 'Big Daddy' of Western airlift.) are still around, and the new C-17 Globemaster III aircraft (Of which the one hundredth airframe was just delivered to the Air Force and named after retiring Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina at the same time he turned 100.), which is partially a replacement for the C-141 and partially to fill the gap between the Starlifters and the Galaxies is proving to be everything the Air Force hoped for and paid to develop and procure, has given the US a better availability in airlift then in 1991. The depression in civilian air travel since 9/11, and the decade-worth of growth in the air delivery business, have also improved the pool of civilian aircraft available to the US military that can be impressed to move personnel and material quickly.
Contrast those encouraging signs (Though the US could always use more SL-7s and definitely needs to procure more C-17s more quickly.) with the situation in Europe. Not a single nation in Europe has anything more then a trivial force of heavy lift transport aircraft or ship. Britain, for example, has three ro-ro vessels in her military which are usually operated under civilian charter to help pay for their upkeep. No other nation in Europe has even that much sealift, and some operate their fleet logistical vessels under charter. In terms of airlift, beyond some C-130s and French-made C-160s, there is no real long range, heavy lift presence. The situation is not likely to improve anytime soon, despite Airbus's proposed A400M military transport aircraft which the European Union is keen on to promote military cooperation and improve efficiency. It can all be traced to the fact that European defense budgets are smaller and less stable (Being subjected to the whims of the current government even within the approved fiscal year.), and the spending priorities those same governments have where defense is not very high. One reason why the A400M will probably never see the light of day is that Germany, which is suppose to purchase about 40% of the projected initial order for the aircraft, is going through a major governmental fiscal crisis right now, and is likely to cut her military budget severely, leading to cuts in the order. This will raise the unit price for each aircraft, since Airbus will have to spread the A400M's development costs over a smaller number of aircraft, which will force other countries (Being unable to raise the funding for the program as easily to compensate.) to cut their orders with the higher price, which will lead to increased prices and more cuts. Since the only other competitor in the military heavy lift market is the C-17, which is rather expensive despite being worth every penny, it is likely that Europe will not be able to assemble a military airlift pool anytime within the next decade, with all the deleterious effects that implies for the rest of their military capabilities.
Needless to say, the transport situation is paralleled in a number of other defense fields and technology, like precision guided munitions. If the current course continues, it will be very hard for Europe (And the European Union.) to ever achieve military equality with the US. That is ironic, since one of the aspersions of a unified Europe that has gone through the years was to serve as a military challenger to American power. Short of America handing over both the technology and the systems themselves to Europe, it is increasingly difficult to see how the EU will ever hope to match, let alone overtake, American military supremacy.