Hard Truth: In a Major War, the U.S. Would Rely on European Shipping to Deploy Its Forces
We talk a lot about defense spending. But here’s a more strategic question:
If the U.S. had to move 100,000+ troops and their gear across oceans tomorrow — could it?
Probably Not without European shipping companies.
Let’s look at the numbers:
As of 2024, the entire U.S.-flagged commercial fleet has only ~180 vessels in international trade.
Fewer than 60 are militarily useful (roll-on/roll-off, heavy cargo).
The U.S. Merchant Marine is shrinking — and aging. Many ships are 40+ years old.
The National Defense Reserve Fleet is partly obsolete, with long activation timelines.
(Source: U.S. Maritime Administration, GAO)
Meanwhile:
MSC (Switzerland), Maersk (Denmark), CMA CGM (France), and Hapag-Lloyd (Germany) control over 54% of global container shipping capacity.
These firms already have standing contracts with the U.S. Military Sealift Command for crisis logistics.
(Source: Alphaliner, DoD logistics contracts)
The U.S. cannot fight a large war overseas without European-owned shipping. That’s not even an insult — it’s a structural reality.
And logistics is just the start:
The F-35 is built with components from BAE Systems (UK), Leonardo (Italy), and Kongsberg (Norway).
Saab, Rheinmetall, and MBDA supply systems used in U.S. and NATO missions.
Europe also supports ISR, satellite relays, and base infrastructure for U.S. deployments.
I don't claim to be an expert in geopolitics - but I suspect that recent statements from the US president "not ruling out" claiming Greenland by force may be a factor here.
Greenland has been a Danish territory for 300+ years. This is longer than the United States of America has existed.
I have also noticed that e.g. Lockheed Martin (maker of the F35) is not doing very well on the stock market.
> I have also noticed that e.g. Lockheed Martin (maker of the F35) is not doing very well on the stock market.
There's no "e.g." here. It's only Lockmart, and it's because they recently lost the Next Generation Air Defense contract to Boeing. The rest of the US defense sector is fine (for now).
These statements from the US are more about keeping Europe dependent on the US (and thus the US keeping some geopolitical leverage) than about bolstering the US defense sector.
> Melius Research downgraded Lockheed Martin (LMT) to Hold from Buy with a price target of $483, down from $603. Boeing (BA) had a win over Lockheed on the Air Force’s sixth generation fighter program, the analyst tells investors in a research note. Following the news, Melius upgraded Boeing and downgraded Lockheed. The firm cites competitive losses and growing concerns over Europe’s efforts to reduce reliance on U.S. defense contractors for the downgrade of Lockheed. Europe’s moves may limit the company’s export opportunities, contends Melius.
I think Americans generally underestimate the seismic shift that has happened in defence procurement approach during the past few months in Europe.
Even if the US recovers from its current situation it will be many years until European nations buys weapon systems from the US in volumes resembling the past. The trust isn't there. It would take a long time to rebuild.
Hard Truth: In a Major War, the U.S. Would Rely on European Shipping to Deploy Its Forces
We talk a lot about defense spending. But here’s a more strategic question:
If the U.S. had to move 100,000+ troops and their gear across oceans tomorrow — could it? Probably Not without European shipping companies.
Let’s look at the numbers: As of 2024, the entire U.S.-flagged commercial fleet has only ~180 vessels in international trade. Fewer than 60 are militarily useful (roll-on/roll-off, heavy cargo). The U.S. Merchant Marine is shrinking — and aging. Many ships are 40+ years old. The National Defense Reserve Fleet is partly obsolete, with long activation timelines. (Source: U.S. Maritime Administration, GAO)
Meanwhile: MSC (Switzerland), Maersk (Denmark), CMA CGM (France), and Hapag-Lloyd (Germany) control over 54% of global container shipping capacity. These firms already have standing contracts with the U.S. Military Sealift Command for crisis logistics. (Source: Alphaliner, DoD logistics contracts)
The U.S. cannot fight a large war overseas without European-owned shipping. That’s not even an insult — it’s a structural reality.
And logistics is just the start: The F-35 is built with components from BAE Systems (UK), Leonardo (Italy), and Kongsberg (Norway). Saab, Rheinmetall, and MBDA supply systems used in U.S. and NATO missions. Europe also supports ISR, satellite relays, and base infrastructure for U.S. deployments.
I don't claim to be an expert in geopolitics - but I suspect that recent statements from the US president "not ruling out" claiming Greenland by force may be a factor here.
Greenland has been a Danish territory for 300+ years. This is longer than the United States of America has existed.
I have also noticed that e.g. Lockheed Martin (maker of the F35) is not doing very well on the stock market.
> I have also noticed that e.g. Lockheed Martin (maker of the F35) is not doing very well on the stock market.
There's no "e.g." here. It's only Lockmart, and it's because they recently lost the Next Generation Air Defense contract to Boeing. The rest of the US defense sector is fine (for now).
These statements from the US are more about keeping Europe dependent on the US (and thus the US keeping some geopolitical leverage) than about bolstering the US defense sector.
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/melius-downg...
> Melius Research downgraded Lockheed Martin (LMT) to Hold from Buy with a price target of $483, down from $603. Boeing (BA) had a win over Lockheed on the Air Force’s sixth generation fighter program, the analyst tells investors in a research note. Following the news, Melius upgraded Boeing and downgraded Lockheed. The firm cites competitive losses and growing concerns over Europe’s efforts to reduce reliance on U.S. defense contractors for the downgrade of Lockheed. Europe’s moves may limit the company’s export opportunities, contends Melius.
https://archive.is/2dYB3
huh? Trump wants Europe to go it alone to defend themselves but dont shop around for weapons only buy US made weapons???
I think Americans generally underestimate the seismic shift that has happened in defence procurement approach during the past few months in Europe.
Even if the US recovers from its current situation it will be many years until European nations buys weapon systems from the US in volumes resembling the past. The trust isn't there. It would take a long time to rebuild.
_If ever_, honestly. Like, France’s traditional US-scepticism on military equipment is looking pretty sensible now.
Pretty much.
“No, not like that!”