Critics argue that the government's defense masks a fundamental failure to prioritize civil security in the face of accelerating climate change. By cutting over 50 million euros from the security budget in 2024, the administration signaled a lack of commitment to the very infrastructure needed to protect citizens from increasingly frequent and severe wildfires. Opponents contend that even if new planes take years to build, the state should have acted with greater urgency to place orders as soon as the need became apparent in 2022.
This perspective emphasizes that the government's reliance on European-level procurement has served as a convenient excuse for inaction. Critics point to the fact that while funds for other sectors, such as military aviation, have been maintained or increased, the budget for firefighting equipment was treated as expendable. This choice, they argue, reflects a broader political failure to plan for the realities of a warming planet, leaving firefighters to operate with equipment that is often subject to frequent maintenance issues and mechanical failures.
Ultimately, those challenging the government's record argue that the current situation is a result of political choices, not just industrial constraints. They advocate for a more ambitious, independent approach, including the potential for domestic production of firefighting aircraft. For these critics, the government's response is insufficient because it fails to address the immediate vulnerability of French forests and the communities living near them, who are left to bear the consequences of delayed investments and bureaucratic inertia.