Sixth Generation Fighter Development

Seems pretty much confirmed in the German press.

No surprise to anyone who's ever paid attention to any French military jet cooperation programme.
I cannot think of a single multinational programme they've been involved in since the 60s that bore fruit other than the Jaguar.
And even then?
Dassault killed off the Jaguar M via the Super Etendard.

The state of play in Europe as far as the 6th Gen programmes stand now is precarious and far, far too fragmented.
Airbus have spent the last few months talking to SAAB, who certainly have the engineering talent to develop something viable.

France, will likely go it alone and pull India in to their "team".
It's the most logical path to an economical production order for both.

The UK are the weak link in GCAP and while Italy & Japan are ready and willing to accelerate development the UKs financial issues are a handbrake.
How that's dealt with?
Via bringing Saudi Arabia or other ME state onboard as a financial contributor?
Or as Japan seem to be pushing, bringing in India?
Will be an interesting landscape to survey.

Similarly, will GCAP now seek to bring Germany & Sweden onboard and pursue a broader system of systems approach?
Whilst Germany & Sweden could certainly go alone, can they afford another 5-7yrs wait on top of the expected/claimed 2035 service dates for GCAP/FCAS for a wholly clean sheet project?

2 separate Euro projects was ambitious but doable.
Is adding a 3rd project to that mix economically viable?
I personally don't think so and it would be better if Germany & Sweden can find a niche within GCAP.
I think FCAS will proceed exactly as Dassault and France want it to.
A medium weight and carrier capable airframe suited to France and as a consequence, also India.

What Germany wants and needs from it's 6th Gen, is likely a heavier airframe with more focus on strike and OCA capabilities.
More aligned with GCAP specs and abilities than FCAS.

The US drawdown is intended, IMO, to be a gift to Russia as well as to place pressure on NATO members to buy more US-origin weapons systems.
Trump and Co's binary logic sees only their preferred option of Euro arms sales and greater Euro reliance on US military power, thanks to said pressure, rather than the 2nd and 3rd order consequences of dismantling decades of trust and security infrastructure.

On the need for a Euro strategic bomber.
It's an interesting thought, but it's one I don't see an appetite for within European defence circles.
Strategic bombers are seen primarily as a weapon of offensive intent, a means to impose oneself against an enemy's centres of control, production and population.
That level of aggressiveness is and will, I think, remain absent from Euro weapons procurement and force planning.

I am trying to recall which was the last "Strategic" bomber built in Europe.
I'd guess the V Bombers or the Mirage IV.
It's a mission set that Euro air forces have abandoned for decades, and I'd argue that, given the likeliest enemy is Russia?
That long-range strike is probably best met by GCAP, with its 2000km range.
That would place much of European Russia at risk.
I'd argue that Europe needs to abandon its Parochialism in how it imposes itself.
I have often repeated that Europe's desire for a single foreign policy is, without an effective means of imposing itself outside of trade sanctions, an idealistic naivete.

I do think that it would be GCAP as a manned platform or various new flavours of Ballistc missiles, cruise missiles and drones that make up the rest of any long-range strike, especially at strategic ranges.
Russia's use of Oreshnik, as ridiculous a Wunderwaffen as it is, does point IMO to the expanded use of IRBM and larger as means of delivering conventional long-range strikes.
South Korea's Hyunmo V is an example of what's possible. A bunker busting ballistic missiles capable of precision strike.

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/worlds-largest-warhead-skorean-missile

Lose the MIRV, increase the accuracy and ridiculously powerful kinetic strike becomes possible.
Not quite the "rods from God" but as close as possible without orbiting Tungsten telephone poles.

**Edit**
Adding some news from Aviation week regarding the agreed 8 strand approach to European Deep Strike.