Is Denmark's new ground-based air defense a new IC4 scandal?

[Saithan]

Is Denmark's new ground-based air defense a new IC4 scandal?​

Kim Bjornstrup
November 26, 2025

DEBATE. Slovakia has just purchased a thoroughly tested short-, medium- and long-range ground-based air defense system in Israel for 4 billion. DKK. In Denmark, we have instead chosen to purchase a not yet fully developed European system, and the total price for Denmark's air defense amounts to 58 billion. DKK.​

INOn September 1, the government announced its decision to acquire a ground-based air defense system for Denmark. The price is a staggering 58 billion DKK, but the chosen long-range system has not yet been fully developed. For most Danes over 40, this resonates unpleasantly.

We've seen it before: expensive, ambitious government projects where development runs off budget and schedule – and where the result ends up as a scandal. One only needs to mention the acquisition of the IC4 trains in the 00s to understand how wrong things can go when political considerations and technological optimism trump common sense.
The article continues below the reference…

The government has decided that Denmark will purchase its ground-based air defense in Europe and has therefore chosen a number of different manufacturers from Norway, Germany, France and Italy, which together cover both short-range, medium-range and long-range systems. The long-range ground-based air defense is called SAMP/T NG, and it is being delivered by a Franco-Italian consortium (Eurosam). However, it is still under development and is to replace the original SAMP/T.

Slovakia has saved billions by buying Israeli​

The choice of SAMP/T NG means that we are rejecting fully developed and combat-tested systems from, among others, the USA and Israel, which have already demonstrated their effectiveness.
In comparison, Slovakia recently signed a deal with the Israeli company IAI for the fully developed Barak MX air defense system for a price of just 4 billion DKK. The Barak MX can fire short-, medium- and long-range missiles from the same launcher. It requires less manpower and can be delivered quickly.

Denmark is therefore paying over 50 billion kroons more for some systems, where the long-range is still in the development phase. According to the Ministry of Defence, Denmark will receive a total of eight systems , two of which will be long-range SAMP/T units, while the other six will cover medium and short-range defence.
The article continues below the reference…

Some parts can be delivered in a few years, but other components only exist on the drawing board. This means that parts of the air force will not be operational until several years into the future.

While we wait for this future air defense, we are currently faced with a very limited preparedness. The recent “drone case” over Kastrup Airport showed this with all possible clarity. For 4.5 hours, air traffic was at a standstill because some drones were apparently flying over the area – without us having the technology to either detect or take them down.

Ironically, several years ago, the Danish company Weibel had already offered a radar system for just 20 million kroner that could have prevented the incident. But the offer was not accepted.
NATO has been warning Denmark for years about the shortcomings of our defense – and especially our air defense. The promised combat brigade exists mostly on paper, and without an effective air defense, it is symbolic at best. An air defense cannot be improvised. It requires technology, training and time – three things we do not have in abundance.

Israel can deliver by the end of 2025​

It is of course commendable that Denmark wants to support the European defense industry and promote cooperation within NATO. But when investing 58 billion kroner, functionality and security of supply should outweigh symbolic politics.

The chosen solution has not yet been field-tested, and several parts of the system need to be fully developed along the way. In the meantime, the Danish Armed Forces plan to lease interim solutions, including NASAMS from Norway and IRIS-T systems, until the European project is ready.

These temporary costs are already included in the 58 billion. Slovakia is roughly the size of Denmark, and the country has purchased six ground-based air defense systems from Israel – two long-range and four short-range. The systems are fully developed, tested and ready for delivery by the end of 2025.
The article continues below the reference…

The Israeli Ministry of Defense states that the Barak MX delivered can hit targets between 35 and 150 km and also includes training, technical documentation, simulators, spare parts, a two-year warranty and local industry participation.

It is possible that the Danish system, in addition to being 30 percent larger, also covers a larger area, but the Slovak system is still delivered at a tenth of the Danish price. When Denmark chooses to pay an additional price of over 50 billion kroner just to stick with European suppliers, one should ask oneself:
Is this a strategic investment – or an expensive declaration of loyalty to Brussels and Paris?

Even for the parties in the Danish Parliament, information about the agreement is limited. A defense spokesman from one of the compromise parties has stated that further details will only be available at a later date. Until then, both politicians and citizens must take the government's word for it.

The lack of transparency is worrying​

The lack of transparency is in itself worrying. When making one of the largest military purchases in Danish history, it should be done on an informed and comparable basis – not on faith, hope and European solidarity.

With the decision to spend so many billions of kroner on a ground-based air defense, the acceleration fund has now been depleted. This means that the government must find new funds for other necessary investments – such as new frigates, more F-35 fighter jets, anti-submarine aircraft for the Arctic and long-range precision weapons. And then we still lack anti-drone systems to protect our airports.

The question is whether the purchase of ground-based air defense is actually strengthening Denmark's defense to an extent that justifies an investment of 58 billion kroner, or whether a panic purchase is too expensive and at the same time simply postponing the technical problems to the next generation?

When you look at the process, it's hard not to draw parallels to the IC4 project. There too, unfinished technology was chosen, which had to be adapted along the way. There too, warnings were ignored, and the consequences were costly.

History shows that when the state buys something that has to be developed first, it rarely ends well. This should be an experience we had learned from – not repeated at 58 billion kroner. So yes, the question is no longer whether the comparison with IC4 is fair. The question is rather how many IC4 cases we can afford before we learn from them.

Kim Bjørnstrup has had an international career in the pharmaceutical industry as, among other things, CEO of Octapharma AG Switzerland, CEO of BPL Ltd. UK and Chairman of the Board of the listed Veloxis AS.


source: https://olfi.dk/2025/11/26/er-danmarks-nye-jordbaserede-luftforsvar-en-ny-ic4-skandale/
____________________________________

I think the writer has a point. but he completly ignores that Europe has similar systems in Iris-T and SAMP, Sky Sabre and such. And just focuses on something being developed.