France’s Rafale fighter jet has long been positioned as a symbol of strategic autonomy in global defence markets. Unlike many Western combat aircraft, Rafale has traditionally been marketed as largely free from U.S. export vetoes, giving France and its customers greater political and operational flexibility.
The acquisition of LMB Aerospace, a Rafale supplier, by the U.S.-based Loar Group has therefore triggered renewed scrutiny. Media reports suggest that this deal could expose Rafale to U.S. export controls, undermining one of its key strategic advantages.
This article examines what has actually changed — and what has not.
The Acquisition: What Is Confirmed
In December 2025, American aerospace firm Loar Group completed the acquisition of LMB Fans & Motors (LMB Aerospace) for approximately €367 million.
LMB Aerospace is a French small-to-medium enterprise that supplies electric fans and motors used in several French military platforms, including:
• Dassault Rafale
• French naval vessels and submarines
• Military helicopters and land systems
LMB does not provide core combat systems, avionics, sensors, weapons, or flight-critical software. However, it is part of certified defence supply chains and that makes it strategically relevant.
Why the ITAR Question Has Resurfaced
Rafale’s export appeal has always rested on limited exposure to U.S. International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). ITAR can restrict not only the export of U.S. weapons but also the re-export of systems containing U.S.-controlled components or data.
ITAR in Law
In legal terms:
• ITAR applies to U.S.-origin defence technology
• Company ownership alone does not automatically trigger ITAR jurisdiction
On paper, the acquisition of a French supplier by a U.S. firm does not automatically place Rafale under U.S. control.
ITAR in Practice
However, history matters as “The United States” has repeatedly demonstrated that ITAR is not applied purely as a technical rulebook. It has been used as a strategic and political instrument, including:
• Delaying or blocking third-party exports
• Imposing compliance reviews at critical moments
• Using regulatory ambiguity as leverage in negotiations
Even limited U.S. involvement compliance oversight, managerial access, or future technology insertion — can provide grounds for asserting jurisdiction.
This is why concerns around the LMB acquisition are not imaginary.
The Golden Share: France’s Structural Safeguard
A key element often overlooked in public discourse is the French government’s golden share in LMB Aerospace.
The acquisition was approved under France’s foreign investment screening regime, which applies strict controls to defence-related assets. As part of this approval, the French state retained a golden (preferred) share.
What the Golden Share Enables
The golden share gives France the legal authority to:
• Veto changes to strategic activities
• Block relocation of production, R&D, or key personnel
• Prevent unauthorised technology transfer
• Intervene if ownership decisions affect defence readiness or delivery timelines
In practical terms, this means France retains decisive control over how LMB operates on French soil.
If delays are induced whether commercially or due to external pressure, the French state has the authority to intervene directly.
What the Golden Share Does Not Do
To be precise:
• It does not nullify U.S. law
• It cannot prevent Washington from asserting ITAR jurisdiction externally
• It cannot force U.S. export approvals
However, it prevents U.S. ownership from being converted into operational leverage inside France and weapons getting assembled in France.
This distinction is crucial.
Most ITAR leverage works through supply-chain disruption and procedural delays. The golden share acts as a domestic counter-lever, ensuring continuity of production and predictability of deliveries.
Supplier Alternatives and Industrial Flexibility
France and Europe do possess alternative industrial capabilities through companies such as Safran, Thales, and Liebherr. However:
• Replacing a certified supplier is time-consuming
• Aviation systems require extensive requalification
That said, the existence of alternatives ensures France is not structurally trapped by a single supplier.
Political Debate vs Strategic Reality
Opposition in the French National Assembly reflects a broader concern: strategic autonomy is eroded incrementally, not through a single event.
Each foreign acquisition:
1. Adds legal complexity
2. Increases compliance friction
3. Introduces potential leverage points
This does not mean Rafale has lost its autonomy but it does mean the margin is being watched more closely.
Final Assessment: Risk Exists, Control Remains
The acquisition of LMB Aerospace by a U.S. firm does not automatically compromise Rafale’s export independence.
At the same time, dismissing concerns entirely would ignore:
1. The U.S. track record of flexible ITAR interpretation
2. The strategic value of supply-chain leverage
3. The importance of legal ambiguity in export controls
France has mitigated this risk through a golden share and regulatory oversight, ensuring that operational control, timelines, and industrial decisions remain sovereign.
The most accurate conclusion is this:
Rafale remains a highly autonomous platform but autonomy today is managed, not absolute.
