Defence deals are stuck on paperwork, not factories, six countries' news suggests

Fact-check index: 70/100 — The six core procurement stories are accurately attributed to their named sources, but the article's connecting hypothesis and causal interpretations go well beyond what the headline-level source material establishes.

• Türkiye's 2027 defence/security budget to rise 229%, a record increase (Defence24.com) — Matches source headline exactly: 'A 229% increase: Türkiye's record-breaking defence and security budget for 2027'.
• Switzerland admitted failings in F-35 purchase and agreed procurement reforms — Matches Defence Industry Europe headline exactly.
• Ukraine joined NSPA, opening NATO tenders to Ukrainian defence firms — Matches both cited headlines (Defence Industry Europe and News On AIR).
• New Zealand procurement-rules changes opening defence supply chain to foreign suppliers — Matches Insurance Business headline, though that source frames it via an insurance broker's business expansion rather than purely a government rules story.
• South Korea's LIG D&A is challenging a two-year bid ban — Matches Businesskorea headline exactly.
• Canada weighing Türkiye's SSB as a template for its own arms sector — Matches Daily Sabah headline exactly.
• Hypothesis: binding constraint on rearmament is institutional throughput, not factory capacity — This is the article's own interpretive framing; only headlines are available for sourcing, which don't support or refute this causal claim.
• Switzerland's problem was never whether F-35s could be built, only the buying process — Plausible given the headline's focus on procurement reform, but the specific framing is an inference beyond what the headline states.
• Ukraine's NSPA entry does not add production capacity, only opens purchasing access — Consistent with headline wording ('opens tenders') but the capacity-vs-access distinction is the article's own gloss.
• New Zealand's change is a rules shift, not a new shipyard — Reasonable paraphrase of the headline but an added interpretive framing not explicit in the source title.
• Canada is shopping for an agency design, not a factory blueprint — Consistent with 'model for domestic arms sector' headline, but 'agency design vs factory blueprint' is the article's own framing.
• LIG D&A dispute shows institutional process working as designed and able to slow spending — Headline only states a bid ban is being challenged; the interpretive claim about institutions 'slowing spending as much as unlocking it' is not established by the source alone.