Europe has access to the US market, so I don't fully understand the issue here. Is it that a future leader might decide to cut access to launch off?

Another key point not really addressed here is the need for something to subsidise reusable launch. Falcon 9/Starship could only be cheaper by launching often. The market alone doesn't provide that demand, so SpaceX had to create demand with Starlink, and possibly orbiting data centres in the future.

This seems to be a point that rocket enthusiasts miss. 'Build it and they will come' doesn't seem to work. A European rival will need to find their own profitable mass launch need to bring down launch costs.

Maybe a final point - but take away SpaceX, and America does not look so hot. Who else has actually built a cheap reusable rocket? It is SpaceX and no one else - European or American - so far.

What is Europe’s space industry like? Is it either too small to build this stuff, or is it too big to pivot out of what they’re already doing?

Edit: or are they all “policy experts” writing white papers about what sombody else should be doing.

HN title is a mix of the article's title & subtitle, with a dash of the (linked) research paper which it's about.

This disparity is going to expand dramatically when starship starts launching actual missions with some kind of regularity.

That any space faring nation is not working on reusable vehicles a decade after SpaceX proved it possible feels as head in the sand as V8 engines instead of electric.