A multi-billion-dollar contract between the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the United States fell through months ago, but sources tell Military.com that a newly collapsed negotiation may have been about more than just money.
In November, a deal collapsed when multiple European allies of the United States ditched plans and aborted a multi-billion-euro plan to collectively procure six Boeing E-7A Wedgetail airborne warning and control system (AWACS) aircraft to replace NATO’s aging Boeing E-3A fleet, of which there are currently 14 operating Sentry aircraft based out of Geilenkirchen, Germany.
Dutch State Defense Secretary Gijs Tuinman said at the time that European members were moving forward themselves to explore alternatives for fleet replacement and seeking new partners, saying, "The U.S. withdrawal also demonstrates the importance of investing as much as possible in European industry."
In July 2025, the U.S. withdrew from the alliance’s intentions to replace a deteriorating fleet that will reach the end of its service life in 2035 and according to the Dutch Defense Ministry is causing noise pollution.
One month prior, the Pentagon pulled out of the replacement program, alluding to production delays, concerns about the E-7's survivability in "contested environments,” and a per-plane cost increase from $588 million to $724 million.
By December 2025, the ambiguity surrounding NATO’s next moves became more compounded.
Behind-The-Scenes Process
A former senior NATO official who requested anonymity told Military.com that an RFI (Request for Information)—a formal yet non-binding document issued to potential suppliers or vendors—was sent to Boeing and American aerospace and defense technology company L3 late last year.
However, per that source, the 100-plus page RFI was sent out Dec. 19 and was due by Jan. 31, 2026, with holiday time not factored into the process.
That private RFI, if you will, only included Boeing and L3 and not other companies like Saab that may now be in pole position to get a NATO contract.
“It’s strange that SAAB thinks they are a perfect match when they don’t meet original requirements (aircrew size, range, etc.),” the ex-senior NATO source said. “The only aircraft to meet those requirements was the E-7.”
Saab CEO Micael Johansson has openly pushed for the Swedish firm’s GlobalEye to be the top prospect in NATO negotiations, telling Breaking Defense during the Berlin Security Conference last November that “SHAPE [Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe] has looked into this [future AWACS operations with GlobalEye] now and they have concluded that this capability will fill a gap if you use it in a proper way.”
He added that Saab was “not there yet” in the stage of moving into acquisition and replacing the aging E-3 fleet.
“Saab has provided information to NSPA regarding GlobalEye, which we believe is a great match for NATO’s requirements for airborne early warning and control capability,” a Saab spokesperson told Military.com earlier this week. “We refer further information about NATO’s procurement process regarding this capability to the NSPA.”
The NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA), headquartered in Luxembourg, is the alliance's primary organization for multinational acquisition, logistics, medical and infrastructure support.
Military.com reached out to NSPA for comment but received no response.
NATO's Clandestine Remarks
Military.com contacted NATO with a request for comment on Saad and Sweden’s role in ongoing negotiations, how that impacted the tanked RFI involving Boeing and L3 from December.
Also, a copy of the document in question—labeled “unclassified” but also as a “non-public” RFI—that was only allegedly sent to Boeing and L3 was also requested.
In light of recent developments, participating nations have chosen to reexamine the acquisition strategy and review their options. This work is ongoing and will follow NSPA’s procurement regulations. The document you are referring to is not releasable to the public. - a NATO official to Military.com
A Pentagon spokesperson declined to comment to Military.com on negotiations.
A Boeing spokesperson provided Military.com with this pithy response: “We’ll defer to the customer on their acquisition process.”
Efforts by Military.com to reach L3 were unsuccessful.
Former AWACS Commander Chimes In
A former NATO AWACS commander who requested anonymity told Military.com that when they left their role about two years ago, the E-7 route was fully being vetted to be made operational for eventual negotiations.
“I thought it was interesting that they wanted to go the Boeing E-7 route to begin with, just given how expensive the platform is for the NATO nation to procure that,” said the source, who retired in 2024.
The nuances within the alliance and the procurement process also shine brightly, the source noted, due to a smaller team inside of NSPA that has to find nations willing to pony up funds for these contracts.
“If you think about the very first NATO AWACS, when the contract was signed in the early 70’s…there's only a handful of nations that said, ‘Hey, we're providing procurement dollars to buy those aircraft.’ They figure out what nations are in, and then they start looking at what are the options based on those nations and the funding they're saying they're willing to commit,” the source said.
The U.S. position is not a shock considering long-expressed concerns about American money doubling or tripling alliance member nations, which include for example Northern European nations that have less money to put towards such platforms.
“Those dynamics are lost in the fact that it's not just a nation trying to buy something; you're trying to get a whole bunch of nations to cost-share something on the procurement side,” the source added. “Even on the current AWACS program, you've got only a handful of nations. They fly and fix that thing, and then all the O&M [operation and maintenance] costs are funded by all 32 nations.”
There is a symbiosis between the financial and geopolitical sides, the source added, as nations who offer funding mechanisms also may want a depot in their countries to provide further work, employment that is nation-specific.
That industrial benefit is already occurring and has been within the E-3 program being phased out.
“When you take the airplane apart, part of it goes to Italy to get fixed, part goes to Belgium to get fixed, part of it goes to Turkey to get fixed,” the source added. “They all get their economic benefit from that investment.”
“When the U.S. pulled out, I think it kind of really fell apart for NATO on the E-7 side,” they added.
