Obviously, the decision of Germany not to retain the F35 as candidate to replace its 90 Tornado, does not suit NATO at all. In any case, this is the meaning of many declarations and publications more or less official, in relation to the alliance.
Among the criticisms addressed to the German government, that of weakening the alliance by choosing a device which will be "obsolete" within ten years, the "difference in performance between Typhoon and F35”, and the possible abandonment of the capacity to carry the B61 nuclear bomb. We can therefore get an idea of the pressures placed on Belgian officials for the choice of the aircraft to replace its F16s, and we are not surprised that the German government is singled out for favor its industry (over the US industry?), as is the French government, suspected of being at the origin of this decision. It is true that France has always had an immense influence on Germany in terms of Defense...
Especially since each of these arguments is largely questionable. Thus, the Typhoon will have, as the Rafale, a modernization plan integrated into the FCAS program, so as to maintain its operational capabilities. It is also interesting to note that it seems that Germany is considering providing some of its Typhoon advanced jamming and electronic warfare capabilities. From a performance point of view, the Typhoon has absolutely nothing to envy of the F35, with speed, ceiling, maneuverability, range and payload capacity superior to the American plane. There remains nuclear capacity, which remains to be addressed. But we can think that the recent Defense agreement between France and Germany opens possibilities in this direction.
Finally, and this is not neutral, but by ordering Typhoon and not the F35, Germany will benefit from a budgetary return exceeding 75% of the sums invested. An important parameter as German growth, forecast for 2019 at 1,1%, seems to be showing signs of weakness.