Why most U.S. allies are unlikely to build modern strategic bombers

Will any U.S. ally build or buy a modern heavy bomber?

Probably not outside a possible multinational effort, because refuelled fighters offer most allies more flexibility at much lower logistical cost.

Australia, Britain, and France as the few U.S. allies whose geography or dispersed interests might justify a strategic-bomber force. Even for them, tanker-supported F-35s are easier to fund and deploy than the enormous maintenance, basing, and personnel train behind heavy bombers. America's scale makes the B-21 and long-lived B-52 useful in a way most allied force structures cannot reproduce. Britain's V-force experience also showed how expensive a dedicated bomber arm became once its nuclear and conventional missions changed. The later CVA-01 and F-111K choices demonstrate the danger of cancelling one flexible system on the promise of another and then funding neither.