

And the EU has been fumbling the bag on advanced aeronautics practically since its inception.
This is disinformation.
Arianespace pioneered commercial satellite launches and in the 90s peaked at 60% of the market through domestic technology, with the French having developed ICBMs and SLBMs for national security. Meanwhile Airbus drove Northrop and McDonnell-Douglas out of the airliner market and is now out-competing Boeing. And regarding missiles MBDA is competitive as well, with some products like the Meteor leading the way in implementing ramjets.
Jet engines are dominated by the UK and US true, but Safran is still competitive enough to matter (through CFM for commercial or by themselves for military purposes), and although not in the EU Rolls-Royce is much friendlier to cooperation with the EU than American firms.
The EU is currently behind on drones, stealth, and reusable rockets. But that is not indicative of decades-long inability.
Right, I should make myself clearer. I’m no expert in economics, I just try to build a reasoning based on what I know.
The context of his statement is that Russia is outproducing the West in ammunition, specifically artillery shells. Earlier he states Russia is producing 4 millions shell a year compared to .5 for the US. So without qualification, the statement implies Russians are somehow 80x superior as they produce 8 times more with an economy a tenth the size.
I feel he should have qualified his statement to improve reader understanding:
Because he didn’t provide this context to the number he is giving, I thought that either he wanted to misled or he was not sufficiently informed, and assumed the more charitable option.