AUKUS Treaty NEWS ONLY

[Pioneer]

"Part of that may be solved by having more permanent presence here - I'm sure more than a few RN crews will welcome a chance to billet in Australia"

Yeah, I don't know GTX, this only emphasis our incompetence. It's remanicent of the 1960/70's when we had to rely of the British to fill out our crew numbers in the RAN when we struggled to crew our carriers and subs.

"Not really. Indonesia, along with other regional players such as Malaysia and Philippines are concerned about China as well. they just don't have the resources to do anything about it more than being minor 'speed bumps'. This sort of development might actually be welcomed"

Personally don't have much faith in either Malaysia and especially Philippines, what with that made hatter Rodrigo Duterte.

"I believe there may be a change in direction for some programs. for instance a greater focus on the Air-Sea-Space aspects might signal a reduction in focus for Land domain. Therefore be prepared for potential changes on the Land907Ph2/Land8160/Land 8116/Land 400-3 fronts. One might also see link ups - e.g. OMFV-L400-3 would make a practical combined program."

Well, as just demonstrated, if we can have a Captain's Pick that axes a $90 billion sub program (which less face it is and always was a joke), then why not. It's somewhat ironic and scitosphrenic in my opinion that Scotty and Dutton have openly promoted the imperative necessity of comparability with the US and Britain in this "forever alliance", and yet, as I've mentioned previously, if our politicians/military is so intune with this necessity, why the hell have we just committed our army balls and all to either German or South Korean ARV, IFV and SPH's, not to mention an all German truck fleet?
Sorry, as I said earlier, it all seems very scitosphrenic to me.


P.S., I wonder where Scomo is going to put his model of the cancelled French submarine now. Maybe the grin on his face already tells us

Regards
Pioneer

 

[uk 75]

It does look like "damage limitation" for the French elections mixed with Macron's own Trumpian style. Ask the scientists at Oxford Astrazeneca about that one.
It does not help that UK now has two carriers while France's single ship is back home. Okay I know that the UK can only deploy one but having the spare makes it easier.
"East of Suez" always took second place to our Western European Union commitment to provide BAOR and RAF Germany.
Those days have long gone. One consequence of the Ajax fiasco would be to revert to the Air Portable Brigades (Infantry and 105mm guns) and let the German, French and Poles provide Armour for the Continent. The Apache force would be our most useful contribution.
With both the US and Australians using the M1 Abrams the UK could then go over to a cadre of M1 in the UK and Canada to keep its Armoured Brigade able to regenerate

 

[Pioneer]

I can understand why the French would be mad but this seems rather ridiculous. Don't they have a long history of putting their own industry first? (which is entirely understandable) They've definitely "thrown their weight around" when it comes to their participation on multi-national projects. So is this display of outrage at the US/UK really necessary?

I think the French are pissed, because they saw this Australian/French sub development having plenty of sales opertunity to other navies - and many a foreign government/corporation have loved the self-promotional aspect of Australia selecting their weapons system.
I guess one should also appreciate that this is not the first time the French have been short sheeted by Australia - if you recall the Dassault Rafale snub.

Regards
Pioneer

 

[jeffb]

Yes, what's being drowned out in the hubub about nuclear technology transfer is the fact that the new pact includes basing of US strategic bombers ** and munitions ** in Australia. It also includes an unspecified number of new US bases in northern and southern Australia.

As mentioned earlier - see the Bare Bases (the grey dots in the map below):

Government announces $1.1 billion upgrade of Top End air base

The money will be spent on upgrading RAAF Base Tindal, outside Katherine in the Northern Territory, which is seen as one of the most strategically important defence precincts for both Australia and the United States.

www.abc.net.au

Most of the money, $737 million, will be spent on extending the runway and building new fuel storage facilities so that the base can deal with larger aircraft, including US long-range bombers and Australian refuelling aircraft.

 

[jeffb]

P.S., I wonder where Scomo is going to put his model of the cancelled French submarine now. Maybe the grin on his face already tells us

Regards
Pioneer

Pretty sure the French have a few suggestions.

 

[Archibald]

The French are really pissed or it's Friday. Either could explain their actions.

Friday is traditionally the day of "no meat, FISH instead" - an enduring christian tradition even in the days of laicity.

Related ?

 

[jeffb]

Yes, what's being drowned out in the hubub about nuclear technology transfer is the fact that the new pact includes basing of US strategic bombers ** and munitions ** in Australia. It also includes an unspecified number of new US bases in northern and southern Australia.

As mentioned earlier - see the Bare Bases (the grey dots in the map below):

Government announces $1.1 billion upgrade of Top End air base

The money will be spent on upgrading RAAF Base Tindal, outside Katherine in the Northern Territory, which is seen as one of the most strategically important defence precincts for both Australia and the United States.

www.abc.net.au

Most of the money, $737 million, will be spent on extending the runway and building new fuel storage facilities so that the base can deal with larger aircraft, including US long-range bombers and Australian refuelling aircraft.

There's also this:

Secret plans for new port outside Darwin to accommodate US Marines

Secret planning has begun for a new port facility just outside Darwin which could eventually help US Marines operate more readily in the Indo-Pacific.

www.abc.net.au

This plan, the AUKUS Pact, has obviously been in train from some time. Nuclear submarine technology just the icing on the cake.

 

[Archibald]

P.S., I wonder where Scomo is going to put his model of the cancelled French submarine now. Maybe the grin on his face already tells us

Regards
Pioneer

Pretty sure the French have a few suggestions.

I'm reminded of "Die Hard with a vengeance" phone chat between hangover McClane, police, and playful Simon Gruber. And a pissed-off Zeus.

As it was translated in French, Zeus tells Simon Gruber

"Since your grandiose plan is such a well lubricated mecanic; then you probably guess where you can stick the said plan".

("si ton plan est si bien huile, ben tu sais ou tu peut te le fourrer")

Hint: where "Three kings" find Saddam treasure map on that Iraqi prisoneer of war ROTFL gotta love US movies from the late 90's

This also applies to submarines indeed, with their gently rounded tip...

I can see Macron telling Socmo "tu peut garder le modele du sous marin - et te le fourrer la ou je pense..." ( can't translate the last words but you get the point - basically "stuff it where the sun never shines"...)

 

[jeffb]

$1.6 billion to upgrade RAAF Base Tindal to protect Australians and create jobs | Prime Minister of Australia

www.pm.gov.au

...The investment is part of the $8 billion we are spending over the coming decade on Defence facilities in the Top End, as part of the Defence White Paper and under our Developing Northern Australia initiatives.

“It will be integral to our Alliance with the United States, and increase the reach of Air Force capabilities in the Indo-Pacific."

Sorry, I know this is all off topic, I'm just trying to fold in some of the bigger picture elements to this "Australian Nuclear Subs" deal. I'll give it a rest now.

 

[Archibald]

However......why hasn't Paris recalled their Ambassador to the UK?
Depending on other factors we may yet see that happen.

We're waiting for their declaration of war to arrive....

1000 years of mutual animosity means we get the next level up...

Be carefull what you wish for... we are readying the cow catapults, bringing them on the Pas de Calais cliffs to shell Dover across the Channel...

"La vache. Envoyez la vache...!"

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ8jGqdE2iw

More to the point...

King Macron: Go and tell your english master that we have been charged by God with a sacred quest. If he can provide us food and shelter for the next two decades, he can join us on the quest for the Holy Nuclear Submarine.

SOCMO : Well, I'll ask him, but I don't think he'd be very keen. He's already got some, you see? and so do we.

King Macron: [puzzled] What?

SOCMO (he thinks we have some !)

Sir Naval Group: They said they already got some... can we come in and have a look ?

SOCMO - of course not. You are french types.

King Macron - What are you then ?

SOCMO - I AM AUSTRALIAN. HOW DO YOU THINK I HAD THIS OUTRAGEOUS ACCENT YOU SILLY FRENCH ??!!

King Macron: Since when you australians are procuring british nuclear submarines ?

SOCMO : Mind your own business !

 

[H_K]

Whatever side of the geopolitical chasm you stand on, I'd like to think we can all agree that recalling ambassadors over this is just a wittle bit of an overreaction.

I'm not so sure. Effectively, the US, UK and Australia have told the French that they a) Aren't trusted, b) Don't matter, and/or c) Don't deserve to be at the table for strategic decisions involving war & peace in the Indo Pacific... and potentially elsewhere.

The one thing the French hate is being ignored as a (smallish) world power / UN Security Council member, largest continental European power etc. Part of the way one maintains this status is by being a difficult partner who always keeps others guessing. This forces others to pay attention and not take France for granted.

It sounds a bit churlish but it is good diplomacy (think of your wife when she gets angry lol!).

Also pragmatically the French know they would likely get dragged into any conflict against China. This is a message to the US: don't expect us to be there for you if you don't keep us in the loop. If nothing else, they will probably be able to extract some concession from the Biden administration in some other domain (e.g. support for operations in Africa).

 

[Archibald]

best part was this

Part of the way one maintains this status is by being a difficult partner who always keeps others guessing. This forces others to pay attention and not take France for granted.
It sounds a bit churlish but it is good diplomacy (think of your wife when she gets angry lol!).

ROTFL, hit the nail squarely on the head. Calling back the ambassador is exactly that. Nothing more. A polite but strong way of saying PAS CONTENT - NOT HAPPY.

Ever saw Asterix Mission Cleopatre ? PAS CONTENTS, PAS CONTENTS, PAS CONTENTS !!!

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lpm206Waok8

 

[F-14D]

I can understand why the French would be mad but this seems rather ridiculous. Don't they have a long history of putting their own industry first? (which is entirely understandable) They've definitely "thrown their weight around" when it comes to their participation on multi-national projects. So is this display of outrage at the US/UK really necessary?

Excellent point. We've seen examples of this recently. The German decision on its replacement for Tornado, Typhoon and Super Bug, is a prime example,

One of Germany's requirements was that the aircraft they bought would have to be able to get clearance to use US nuclear weapons. Multiple sources say the German AF wanted the F-35, but that France made it clear that if Germany bought the Lightning II they would be removed from the FCAS program. So, although the Hornet E/F has never been designed or cleared for nuclear weapons, Germany thought an Armeican aircraft would have a better chance of getting permission to be modified to do so, so it was ordered alongside the Typhoons.

 

[timmymagic]

I can understand why the French would be mad but this seems rather ridiculous. Don't they have a long history of putting their own industry first? (which is entirely understandable) They've definitely "thrown their weight around" when it comes to their participation on multi-national projects. So is this display of outrage at the US/UK really necessary?

Excellent point. We've seen examples of this recently. The German decision on its replacement for Tornado, Typhoon and Super Bug, is a prime example,

One of Germany's requirements was that the aircraft they bought would have to be able to get clearance to use US nuclear weapons. Multiple sources say the German AF wanted the F-35, but that France made it clear that if Germany bought the Lightning II they would be removed from the FCAS program. So, although the Hornet E/F has never been designed or cleared for nuclear weapons, Germany thought an Armeican aircraft would have a better chance of getting permission to be modified to do so, so it was ordered alongside the Typhoons.

SuperHornet has not been ordered, and might in fact never be ordered.

The German's should just call the French bluff and buy 30 F-35 purely for the nuclear role, the French can't afford to do FCAS without them. Then top up with Typhoon's to keep their production lines busy.

 

[uk 75]

If you have to make a choice between the US or France as a major Ally and source of weapons and technology I am afraid France will usually come off worse.
But not always, Germany for example will do whatever it has to do to maintain close ties with Paris.
India used to be another country that found France a more sympathetic source than the US.
Macron's hystrionics undermine respect for France. A Jean Reno like Gallic shrug would have been my fave. He was the only good thing about the 90s Godzilla film.

 

[Pioneer]

Secret Talks and a Hidden Agenda: Behind the U.S. Defense Deal That France Called a ‘Betrayal’ (Published 2021)

In meeting after meeting with their French counterparts, U.S. officials gave no heads-up about their plans to upend France’s largest defense contract.

www.nytimes.com

Regards
Pioneer

 

[Deleted member 2278]

Whatever side of the geopolitical chasm you stand on, I'd like to think we can all agree that recalling ambassadors over this is just a wittle bit of an overreaction.

I'm not so sure. Effectively, the US, UK and Australia have told the French that they a) Aren't trusted, b) Don't matter, and/or c) Don't deserve to be at the table for strategic decisions involving war & peace in the Indo Pacific... and potentially elsewhere.

The one thing the French hate is being ignored as a (smallish) world power / UN Security Council member, largest continental European power etc. Part of the way one maintains this status is by being a difficult partner who always keeps others guessing. This forces others to pay attention and not take France for granted.

It sounds a bit churlish but it is good diplomacy (think of your wife when she gets angry lol!).

Also pragmatically the French know they would likely get dragged into any conflict against China. This is a message to the US: don't expect us to be there for you if you don't keep us in the loop. If nothing else, they will probably be able to extract some concession from the Biden administration in some other domain (e.g. support for operations in Africa).

If this is how France play the game, then they are doing it wrong. You don't recall ambassadors when someone cancels a submarine contract, you recall ambassadors when someone sinks one of your submarines! France has left itself no-where to escalate to. What is next? An oil-spill off Guadeloupe, it's war with Panama because the tanker is Panamanian flagged?! That sentence doesn't sound as crazy as it would have a week ago.

Who now will engage a French company in a multi-billion $/£/€ (other currencies available) contract? When the dispute system goes all the way up to severance of diplomatic ties?

One does not maintain stable, healthy relationships acting jilted as a matter of course, that's not statecraft! If what France wants is to get ostracized by the wider community, then yeah, this'll do it nicely.

France has every right to be disappointed but at the end of the day, their product wasn't what the customer wanted. France have managed to turn a learning experience into a multi-national incident. For me, that's scary irrational.

 

[Archibald]

Whatever side of the geopolitical chasm you stand on, I'd like to think we can all agree that recalling ambassadors over this is just a wittle bit of an overreaction.

I'm not so sure. Effectively, the US, UK and Australia have told the French that they a) Aren't trusted, b) Don't matter, and/or c) Don't deserve to be at the table for strategic decisions involving war & peace in the Indo Pacific... and potentially elsewhere.

The one thing the French hate is being ignored as a (smallish) world power / UN Security Council member, largest continental European power etc. Part of the way one maintains this status is by being a difficult partner who always keeps others guessing. This forces others to pay attention and not take France for granted.

It sounds a bit churlish but it is good diplomacy (think of your wife when she gets angry lol!).

Also pragmatically the French know they would likely get dragged into any conflict against China. This is a message to the US: don't expect us to be there for you if you don't keep us in the loop. If nothing else, they will probably be able to extract some concession from the Biden administration in some other domain (e.g. support for operations in Africa).

If this is how France play the game, then they are doing it wrong. You don't recall ambassadors when someone cancels a submarine contract, you recall ambassadors when someone sinks one of your submarines! France has left itself no-where to escalate to. What is next? An oil-spill off Guadeloupe, it's war with Panama because the tanker is Panamanian flagged?! That sentence doesn't sound as crazy as it would have a week ago.

Who now will engage a French company in a multi-billion $/£/€ (other currencies available) contract? When the dispute system goes all the way up to severance of diplomatic ties?

One does not maintain stable, healthy relationships acting jilted as a matter of course, that's not statecraft! If what France wants is to get ostracized by the wider community, then yeah, this'll do it nicely.

France has every right to be disappointed but at the end of the day, their product wasn't what the customer wanted. France have managed to turn a learning experience into a multi-national incident. For me, that's scary irrational.

Have a glass of wine and relax. You are over-blowing it. As I posted above, it is just a way of saying LOUD
"Not happy. Pas content."

It will go no further than this, except for Australia paying a big industrial fine because they have broken the contract.

I'm quite sure the Swedes and Germans were no better when the Collins went downhill in the late 90's... and early 2000s. Maybe it was more discrete, but it must have been equally ugly. Just more stealth - under the radar...

 

[Deleted member 2278]

it is just a way of saying LOUD
"Not happy. Pas content."

I think a diplomatic note might have sufficed.

Take it from a concerned friend, you don't get to play that card often.

 

[kaiserd]

With respect there were many a UK politician (and minister) getting even more embarrassingly histrionic in the direction of the US re: clearly not being consulted/ mattering at all to the US re: their decision to withdraw from Afghanistan.
And that was a few weeks ago.
For many contributors memories are very short when there is francophobia to indulge.

And perhaps the UK PR “positioning” (rather than likely ultimate actual role) in what has been so far announced re: this agreement is best seen in the context of the need to save face (both the UKs and the USs) and start patching up relationships following what happened re: Afghanistan. However alienating France (and in doing so not exactly mending fences with other European allies) is an objectively stupid way of proceeding in this context (especially for the UK).

 

[Fluff]

With respect there were many a UK politician (and minister) getting even more embarrassingly histrionic in the direction of the US re: clearly not being consulted/ mattering at all to the US re: their decision to withdraw from Afghanistan.
And that was a few weeks ago.
For many contributors memories are very short when there is francophobia to indulge.

And perhaps the UK PR “positioning” (rather than likely ultimate actual role) in what has been so far announced re: this agreement is best seen in the context of the need to save face (both the UKs and the USs) and start patching up relationships following what happened re: Afghanistan. However alienating France (and in doing so not exactly mending fences with other European allies) is an objectively stupid way of proceeding in this context (especially for the UK).

Expectations when deployed militarily for 20 years together, are somewhat different than business dealings.

I strongly suspect that commitments made to the UK by the US when we went in, were breached when the US came out, hence some name calling and the like.

As Lizzie said, recollections differ......

For some reason, UK doesnt seem to be bearing the brunt of the french anger, who knows why this is.

 

[Archibald]

We lost some billion dollars with the australians, not with UK.

 

[stealthflanker]

So, what French gonna do next i wonder ? Other than Political move.

Will French revisit some old talks e.g With South Korea on creation of SSN's ? Japan might follow the suit and well French could be candidate to supply the technology.

and will the shortfin barracuda remains available for other interesting nation wanting 4000+ Ton class conventional sub ?

 

[Deleted member 2278]

@kaiserd does being critical and dubious of one recent and surely at least noteworthy French diplomatic action constitute francophobia? I hope not. If any and all critique can be simply decried as phobic, then we are all lost!

My French teacher from school on the other hand......

 

[Fluff]

So, what French gonna do next i wonder ? Other than Political move.

Will French revisit some old talks e.g With South Korea on creation of SSN's ? Japan might follow the suit and well French could be candidate to supply the technology.

and will the shortfin barracuda remains available for other interesting nation wanting 4000+ Ton class conventional sub ?

Japan, as the only country on the receiving end of not 1 but 2 nukes, will never go nuclear(I know I know). Butttt with so many nukes in the SCS, maybe Japan could join the team, and provide the conventional subs to do the close patrol work, leaving the nukes to do the long trips.

I'm afraid the conventional barracuda(which doesnt even exist) is a bit like a black mercedes with pink diamond wheels and a crushed velour interior, nice if thats your thing, but hard to shift in the market....

 

[H_K]

For the French there's still the Dutch competition for which Shortfin Barracuda appears well suited.

Might still be winnable for Naval Group as the Australians had no complaints about the design itself. (Seems like all the issues were related to partnership/industrial disagreements, e.g. around workshare, timelines, the cost of Australian participation in the design/build process, cultural management issues... for which both sides are probably to blame).

The French are complaining about being left out of strategic decisions, not about losing the contract per se (which was always at risk). So their diplomatic (over)reaction shouldn't impact other potential deals.

 

[Foo Fighter]

Not in their interests to do so, nor anyone eles's so hopefully this will blow over and we will return to normal.

 

[zen]

Might still be winnable for Naval Group as the Australians had no complaints about the design itself.

From what @Volkodav told us, if Naval Group are such pigs with their customers, then they won't sold any SF Barracuda to anyone.

They need to change their attitudes and behaviour - or so it seems.

It certainly does raise an awful lot of questions. NG should suffer some hard interrogation by the French Government.
Reminds me of TKMS and the problems they tried to hide under the carpet.

 

[GTX]

In the UK we're all expecting Ajax to be cancelled

You know, a joint Ajax Replacement - L400 Ph3 - OMFV program would go well... 5000- 6000 vehicle program. Lot's of room for all to win

 

[GTX]

this is not the first time the French have been short sheeted by Australia - if you recall the Dassault Rafale snub.

Exactly what snub is that? If you are talking about AIR6000 and the decision to go with F-35, it was normal acquisition.

 

[GTX]

I can understand why the French would be mad but this seems rather ridiculous.

I am sure behind closed doors it is all understood. Publicly though there is are domestic political considerations...

 

[_Del_]

Have a glass of wine and relax. You are over-blowing it. As I posted above, it is just a way of saying LOUD
"Not happy. Pas content."

I think there are several things at play here. Obvious factor is the France-Aus submarine deal unwinding. Part is probably a AUKUS arrangement in the Pacific being forged without an invitation to Paris to participate.

I think loudly making a stink in this case puts France in a good position to get some other concessions from DC primarily, but also London (possibly even Canberra to a lesser degree). To the extent that the desire in DC will be to quickly put this in the rear view mirror, I think the odds for a "consolation prize" and concessions on other "unrelated" fronts go up while France chooses to make news headlines with the frank speech and moves like the recall.

So maybe the optics aren't great for France, but in the beltway, the optics might be even worse for the administration in DC who doesn't need another headache or "crisis", real or imagined. Just a bit of realpolitik from Paris, imo. Squeeky wheel gets the grease. Basically zero chance that Paris doesn't come out of this with some sort of sop to reconcile.

 

[GTX]

Folks, In order to deconflict the Replacement of Australia's Collins Class Submarines thread, I have split off those posts not directly related to the Submarine subject into this new thread. Moving forward, this thread can focus on the wider implications and non-submarine aspects of the new treaty.

 

[Archibald]

Folks, In order to deconflict the Replacement of Australia's Collins Class Submarines thread, I have split off those posts not directly related to the Submarine subject into this new thread. Moving forward, this thread can focus on the wider implications and non-submarine aspects of the new treaty.

...and the goddam stupid "like" alert of this forum nearly gave me a heart attack, telling me I had ELEVEN alerts, bliking red like crazy.

 

[GTX]

Sorry - I didn't want posters to start complaining that "my posts vanished and nobody told me".

 

[Archibald]

this is not the first time the French have been short sheeted by Australia - if you recall the Dassault Rafale snub.

Exactly what snub is that? If you are talking about AIR6000 and the decision to go with F-35, it was normal acquisition.

Yps. I hate to say, but Australia wasn't the Rafale worst defeat, by a veeeery long shot
Netherlands
Belgium
Switzerland
....
way too many others

 

[GTX]

Full transcripts of the announcements here:

Additional speeches at AUKUS announcement - CONTACT magazine

Share the post "Additional speeches at AUKUS announcement" FacebookLinkedInPinterestTwitterShare…Email The announcement of a new enhanced trilateral security partnership between Australia, the

www.contactairlandandsea.com

 

[zen]

Arguably Australia could do an exchange here. Type 26 rather lacks it in the radar department compared to the Hunter variant.......
I've often said to get the most out of FLAADS, you need a fixed AESA system.

 

[GTX]

" It's remanicent of the 1960/70's when we had to rely of the British to fill out our crew numbers in the RAN when we struggled to crew our carriers and subs.

Who said anything about the RN filling out the RAN? This was simply about the option of having RN ships based in Australia as part of the treaty.

Personally don't have much faith in either Malaysia and especially Philippines, what with that made hatter Rodrigo Duterte.

It is irrelevant. My comment was more that white they might make public comments saying one thing, behind the scenes/off the record I think they will be quietly happier.

It's somewhat ironic and scitosphrenic in my opinion that Scotty and Dutton have openly promoted the imperative necessity of comparability with the US and Britain in this "forever alliance", and yet, as I've mentioned previously, if our politicians/military is so intune with this necessity, why the hell have we just committed our army balls and all to either German or South Korean ARV, IFV and SPH's, not to mention an all German truck fleet?
Sorry, as I said earlier, it all seems very scitosphrenic to me.

Err...because our acquisition process is working like normal and the US didn't really submit any offers against the likes of of Land 8116 or Land 400Ph3? Personally, i believe a closer relationship with the us on these programs would make strategic/operational sense since we are more likely to fight alongside the US and thus would benefit from common equipment. In fact, I would argue that there is a strong case for the following:

• Land 8116 - go with M109A7 instead of AS9
• Land 400 Ph3 - go with interim loan of Bradleys and then like Land 400Ph3 & OMFV for combined longer term solution. It will be the end of the decade before any vehicles actually enter service for the australian requirement anyway.

 

[GTX]

Australia to pursue nuclear-powered submarines through new trilateral enhanced security partnership | Prime Minister of Australia

www.pm.gov.au