When defense becomes a test of budgetary credibility
What is the point of a military programming law if the figures displayed at the start do not hold up until the end? In the Senate, this question took a very concrete form: should we defend a trajectory of 413.3 billion euros, or correct it to cover all the stated needs?
The sequence takes place in June 2023, during the examination of the 2024-2030 military programming law. The government presents a trajectory of 400 billion euros in budgetary appropriations, to which are added 13.3 billion in programmed physical-financial needs. The Senate believes that certain parameters must be made more readable and more robust.
What happened in the Senate
In the hemicycle, Bruno Retailleau defends the position of the senatorial right. His argument is simple: the armies must not only receive new equipment on paper, they must be able to use it, maintain it and train their personnel. He highlights the 7.4 billion euros which he estimates are still under debate after taking into account the secured resources and the financing mechanisms already integrated.
The Minister of the Armed Forces, Sébastien Lecornu, responds differently. According to him, the figures put forward by the senatorial majority add several elements twice or reinstate margins already taken into account in the initial trajectory. He defends a stricter reading: 413 billion euros of military needs, 5.9 billion of extra-budgetary resources deemed secure, and adjustments which would raise the question of overall budgetary sustainability.
The sticking point is there. For the senatorial right, we must further lock down the execution. For the executive, we must avoid inflating the total by confusing the reading of the amounts. The debate is therefore not only accounting. It also concerns the confidence we place in the displayed trajectory.
One number, many readings
The government’s initial text provides for 400 billion euros in payment credits over 2024-2030 for the Defense mission, with an increase from 47.04 billion in 2024 to 68.91 billion in 2030. The Senate, for its part, is proposing a higher trajectory, to 407.4 billion euros in budgetary appropriations, before adding other elements in the public debate around the overall envelope.
This technical dispute has very concrete consequences. If we adopt a more ambitious trajectory, the beneficiaries are first and foremost the armies, which hope for more operational preparation, equipment maintenance and margins for orders. The defense industry also gains, because better spread credits secure production chains and subcontractors.
Conversely, if we favor budgetary prudence, the winner is the Ministry of Finance, which wants to avoid that too high a programming pushes arbitrations towards the following finance laws. This is precisely the objection raised by the executive: a programming law is not a blank check, and the expenditure must remain compatible with public finances.
The effects are not the same depending on the actors. Large defense companies cope better with variations in trajectory. SMEs depend more on the visibility of orders. For the military, the subject is not abstract: poorly calibrated programming quickly results in delays, postponements of charges, or compromises on activity, maintenance and training.
The real dividing line: ambition or sustainability
The debate on the LPM is not limited to a clash between the senatorial right and the government. In the Senate, the socialists also defend a more demanding line on the objective of 2% of GDP. Their amendment aims to restore the initial version of the text, so that this threshold is reached by 2025 and not pushed back later. Their criticism is political as well as budgetary: if the objective moves back, the programming loses readability.
The government, for its part, justifies the spread by the evolution of macroeconomic hypotheses. The reasoning is classic: if GDP growth differs from that initially assumed, the defense effort in relation to GDP can evolve without the nominal budget being abandoned. The problem is that this logic is often seen as a shift in focus rather than a simple technical correction.
The Senate finally adopted the LPM on July 13, 2023, after having extensively revised the text. The law promulgated on August 1, 2023 sets an amount of physical-financial needs of 413.3 billion euros for 2024-2030. It also formalizes the idea that budgetary appropriations must follow a clear trajectory, with mechanisms intended to limit the gaps between promise and execution.
What to watch for next
The real test is not the one-night vote. It arrives in the annual execution. The next budgetary discussions will reveal whether the military trajectory remains within the euro, whether extra-budgetary resources are there, and whether the arbitrations between the armies, Bercy and Parliament hold without a new political crisis.
This is where the real balance of power is measured. A military program can show big numbers. But without stable execution, it quickly becomes a fragile compromise between strategic ambition, the constraints of public finances and the very concrete needs of the forces.
