By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Norway has removed KNDS Deutschland’s EuroPULS from its rocket artillery competition, leaving U.S. and South Korean systems as the remaining options. This decision occurs amid deepening defense partnerships between Berlin and Oslo, making the exclusion a notable point of contention within the partnership. The U.S. offers HIMARS and GMARS systems, while South Korea’s K239 Chunmoo presents an alternative with local production capabilities. Ultimately, Norway’s choice will influence NATO’s deep-fires architecture, impacting the balance between U.S. influence, Asian suppliers, and Europe’s drive for strategic autonomy.
Read the original article here
Norway Choosing U.S. HIMARS and South Korea’s Chunmoo Over German Rocket Launcher System is a fascinating twist in the world of military procurement, and the situation offers some interesting perspectives.
The first thing that pops out is the complex web of considerations beyond just the raw capabilities of the weapons systems themselves. The German offering, Euro-PULS, which integrates elements from both German and Israeli companies, initially seemed like a strong contender. However, the U.S. manufacturer of missiles for the HIMARS, Lockheed Martin, apparently put up a roadblock, refusing to allow their missiles to be integrated into the Euro-PULS launchers. This immediately complicates things for the German system, and the choice seems to boil down to HIMARS or the Korean system.
Production capacity plays a significant role in this decision-making process. The general consensus appears to be that Germany currently lacks the robust production capabilities to meet the demand for its own systems and the components. The American HIMARS, on the other hand, comes with the advantage of being battle-tested. One might also add the South Korean Chunmoo to the mix, which offers another option for long-range artillery rockets.
Another factor at play here is geopolitical trust and reliability. This is where things get really interesting. The current political climate and perceived unreliability of the United States as a long-term partner has undoubtedly shaken the confidence of many potential buyers. This uncertainty certainly casts a shadow on any procurement decision involving American weapons systems.
The article clearly suggests a move towards a European-centric approach to defense procurement, which is probably a smart move. Investing in European defense industries, fostering interoperability among European allies, and reducing reliance on external suppliers makes a lot of sense. Europe is perfectly capable of producing top-tier defense systems, which is something that has to be supported and invested in.
It is worth noting that political and economic factors are also impacting this decision. The article mentions that Norway and the EU may have had some issues, and that impacts how they view trade. Norway may not want to buy from them if they are putting up obstacles for trade.
The South Korean Chunmoo appears to be gaining some traction due to its openness to integration with third-party components. This flexibility is clearly attractive, and it might make it the superior choice.
It’s also important to remember that there’s a certain level of pragmatism that enters into these decisions. The HIMARS may have been cracked by the Russians, which raises doubts about its long-term viability, but then one has to consider if a country would have any spare parts in a timely manner. The long-term implications are also taken into account.
Ultimately, Norway’s decision to lean towards either the U.S. HIMARS or the South Korean Chunmoo over the German Euro-PULS seems to be a complex interplay of strategic considerations, production capacity, geopolitical trust, and political and economic factors.