Feb 25, 2024
WIKIMEDIA COMMONS
“Yes, we are talking about fighter planes with France,” Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky said at a press conference in Kyiv on Sunday.
Zelensky’s statement at the Ukraine: Year 2024 conference seems to confirm reporting from this year and last that the Ukrainian government has requested some of France’s surplus Mirage 2000 fighters.
What the statement doesn’t confirm is which version of the Mirage 2000 officials are discussing. Most observers assume the Ukrainians want Mirage 2000Ds that French plane-maker Dassault optimized for ground-attack missions. But French officials also have mentioned air-defense-optimized Mirage 2000Cs.
The single-engine, supersonic Mirage 2000 with its distinctive delta-shape wing was the French air force’s main fighter for 20 years starting in the mid-1980s. It began leaving service as new, twin-engine Rafales arrived in meaningful numbers in the early 2000s.
The ultimate version of the Mirage 2000C in French service had a single seat, an RDI pulse-doppler radar, the M53-P2 engine, a night-vision-compatible cockpit and provision for MICA radar-guided air-to-air missiles as well as laser-guided bombs.
The last few Mirage 2000Cs, out of around 120 Dassault built for the French air force, finally retired in 2022. It’s these old but well-maintained airframes an unnamed French official apparently was referring to when, last year, he told France 24 that one option for Paris was to donate to Kyiv 13 Mirage 2000Cs that still had “a bit of potential.”
Those jets could reinforce the Ukrainian air force’s fleet of 40 or s0 1980s-vintage Sukhoi Su-27s that, for two years now, have patrolled Ukrainian air space and occasionally flown low-level bombing sorties.
The surplus Mirage 2000Cs could not reinforce the swing-wing Sukhoi Su-24 bombers that carry Ukraine’s French-made SCALP-EG land-attack cruise missiles. The 200-mile-range SCALPs are some of Ukraine’s best deep-strike munitions.
Two-seat Mirage 2000Ds could bolster the two- or three-dozen Su-24s, however. One of the main differences between the Mirage 2000C and the newer Mirage 2000D, beside the additional seat in the latter, is that the Ds are compatible with SCALPs as well as with most of France’s other precision air-to-ground munitions.
The French air force is upgrading, for another few years of service, 48 of the 86 Mirage 2000Ds that Dassault built, adding new munitions including MICA missiles.
The rest of the D-models are retiring. In theory, they’re available for onward transfer to Ukraine.
The Cs are older. The Ds are younger. The Cs can fire MICA missiles but can’t fire SCALPs. The un-upgraded Ds can’t fire MICAs but can fire SCALPs. Which model the Ukrainians might prefer probably depends on what they want to do with the Mirages: shoot at Russian jets or strike Russian targets on the ground and at sea.
Their preference might not matter. “We expect France to provide us with aviation,” Kyrylo Budanov, the head of Ukrainian military intelligence, told French newspaper Libération earlier this month.
But it’s not up to Budanov or even to Zelensky. French officials have expressed their worry that training Ukrainian pilots on the Mirage 2000 might take too long to make a difference in the two-year-old war. And that maintaining the aging jets would be a challenge for the Ukrainian air force.
Which is why, despite escalating language from Ukrainian leaders, French leaders haven’t yet said yes to Ukrainian Mirage 2000s—and may never say yes.
Follow me on Twitter. Check out my website or some of my other work here. Send me a secure tip.
“Which is why, despite escalating language from Ukrainian leaders, French leaders haven’t yet said yes to Ukrainian Mirage 2000s—and may never say yes.”
The likelihood that Paris says yes, and that these planes will ever make a difference, are so remote that you must use the Hubble telescope to see its tiny speck of light.
I don’t know why the Ukrainians are even wasting their time with this.
Oh, never underestimate the French government’s desire to protect and promote their own industry, Mr. Ofp. They’re in direct competition with Sweden, and in the long run, the market probably isn’t big enough for both Dassault and Saab. So, there’s strategic interests involved, and that’s why this deal may come to pass. If Ukraine has the choice between Gripen and Mirage, though, I think the Swedish fighter offers more benefits.
@gray
if the French were to have ulterior motives you would not want us to believe that the Germans would be the only beings not to have any ?
the 2000D has qualities that the SU24 does not have. that being said, it seems that Ukraine has a number of SU24s.
my country did not send 14 Leclerc tanks because that would have been a poisoned chalice, it supported the choice of the German Leopard, I still trust it to always have the same goodwill towards Ukraine and make sensible/relevant choices .
———-
by the way you said :
“As for your smearing of modern Germany’s commitment to peace and human rights, I don’t think this merrits any response. ”
=> ???!
I don’t know what you understand but
effectively I don’t think this merits any response.
we can of course criticize but we must do so with a certain intellectual honesty.
“if the French were to have ulterior motives you would not want us to believe that the Germans would be the only beings not to have any ?”
I never said so. Of course, the German government also has interests of its industries in mind. Actually, I suspect that’s why Scholz didn’t want to deliver Leo2 tanks, because there had been concerns that this would only expose its vulnerable points. Which actually happened in the first attack.
“the 2000D has qualities that the SU24 does not have.”
Those qualities are covered by the F-16. It doesn’t make much sense to introduce another plane that doesn’t add additional capabilities, imho. The Gripen, on the other hand, is the newer fighter jet, comparable to the Rafale (why not offer these, btw?), can use the excellent Meteor missile and has very helpful STOL abilities. Clearly the better choice, imho. Your French mileage may vary.
Indeed, I saw the deplorable deal that Macron whipped through in the EU about artillery ammo. It’s not only a disgrace, but an entire mountain of stupidity. If Europe had the capacity to produce enough ammo in a reasonable amount of time, I wouldn’t even be aghast about it, but Europe simply can’t.
Poland is blocking borders for commercial interests and France is slowing down the amassing of ammunition, also for commercial interests. They are shooting at their own feet, these idiots.
On the other hand, if the French want to promote their industry, why did they wait so long for this? The Mirages could already be in Ukraine to show what they can do. Or, maybe they are afraid of what they can’t do?
@ gray
“Rafale (why not offer them, by the way?),
probably because we all started with emergency solutions.
Both the F16 and the leopard respond to the same strategy.
Imho, the overwhelming need is for air defence fighters. For bombing missions, the Su-24s are still doing their job, there’s enough of them, as the recent Forbes report showed, and they do have a larger payload. I don’t think it’s worth the effort to retrain pilots on the 2000D, when most of their missions can be done equally well by F-16s. As for the 2000C, is it better than the Gripen in the interceptor role? I don’t think so. The Ukrainian Airforce has to think about long term sustainability and costs of operation. To introduce 3 new western types, with 3 seperate maintenance lines, would be too much for Ukraine’s financial capabilities. If there’s a choice between Gripen and Mirage, the former is offering more benefits. First, the Swedish government needs to come to a clear commitment, though.
Personally, I think that Ukraine should stick with just the F-16 as a fighter, and for ground attack, get the A-10.