And we have a future SCAF project, in which the challenges are of all kinds, in reality, and not just, as you might read in the press, a rivalry between Dassault and Airbus, although I do not hide that rivalry.
Regarding SCAF, I will just remind you of one thing: I do not want to put myself in the place of the authorities of the country.
I am only giving a technical opinion : do I know how to build a combat aircraft from A to Z, in France, of sixth generation?
I repeat it in front of all of you: the answer is yes.
Do I refuse to cooperate with Pierre, Paul, or Jacques? The answer is no. I am ready to cooperate with anyone, designated by the political authorities. It is not up to me to decide with whom we should work or not.
I did it with the Neuron; we cooperated with Swedes, Italians, Spaniards... It went very well. I will give you a key reason why it went well: it’s the recognition that France is a leader in these fields. Dassault Aviation is a leader in the field of combat aviation in Europe. If the partners acknowledge this, there is no problem in cooperating.
Today, the reason why I am raising my voice is because my partners do not recognize the fact that I am a leader. So it is useless to put papers and billions on the table if this kind of understanding is not acknowledged.
Germany, last week, at the highest level, said: “We are ready… we are ready to exclude France from the program.” That is a bit strange... They are going to exclude us from a domain we know and from a program we launched. I will leave them to their statements.
And I repeat: we can do it on our own.
Where I disagree, and I say it loudly and clearly, is that if we want combat aircraft capable of doing the job tomorrow against Americans who are progressing, and against Chinese who are progressing ever faster, we must make the best.
I do not understand how, in an industrial and technological field of this level—which is top-level and surely one of the most complex in the world—I am imposed a governance system that is not based on competence. That’s all I’m saying.
It is not me who says: “I don’t want Germany.” Germany says: “I want equality in Franco-German relations.”
But it is up to the state to say this, for France to take governmental leadership and act as the reference agency… And I do not see why the Germans do not accept it.
So, it’s just that, at my level, if we want the best weapons for France—such as for its airborne nuclear component, or for making a carrier-compatible aircraft—give me the keys to be able to lead it.
That does not mean I want to do everything alone. I will be the architect, that’s what I’m saying. And in front of me, I have people who say: “No, no, every technical, political, tactical decision will be taken by three.”
And among those three, I have one Dassault and two Airbus… including Airbus which depends on Airbus Germany. So in reality, I always have two against one.
I state this very clearly in front of you today. I am not saying we should not work with others. In fact, we did it with the Neuron, and I am not questioning the political authority. The one who will have to engage to get the job done, it’s me.
One last point: if cooperation must cost more to the French budget, that is a choice.
I will take my part, I will stand at attention.
I just tell you that if you want to spend less and get a better aircraft, still look at the rules of industrial governance. And that’s my part, and it’s up to me to say it, and I take responsibility for it.
I don’t do three-cushion shots; I don’t know how and I don’t need to. I am simple.
The approach with SCAF is simple: I ask for the reality of being able to exercise the role of an architect.
If you take two architects and say both are right, you will have two different houses. And if in the end it becomes a single house, it will be somewhat unstable.
I am just asking for clarity. I am not against the project; I said it again yesterday to the press.
But still: When Germany says, “We will exclude the French,” doesn’t that bother you, French politicians?
Germany is going to exclude the French from a combat aircraft development project, all because Dassault says he would still like to have the keys to lead… It’s strange that you don’t react, and I am the only one reacting. So this is indeed a raising-of-the-voice moment.
It is a raising-of-the-voice moment because I know the Germans. Contrary to what one might think, it is the Bundestag that is driving this.
And the Bundestag, what it wants is that the industrial company it sees every day has more work than the other.
Competence, knowing if the aircraft will be effective, that’s not their concern. Believe me, that’s not their concern.
So we just need a balance of power : what do we want?
We want project management, because behind it, you have military personnel who will use this aircraft in 15 or 20 years. It will have to be good.
If it were only about money, I would take the budget and do the bare minimum like the others. But I am not like that. So it is a raising-of-the-voice moment, perhaps a negotiation; some may think it is a negotiation… but it’s about leverage. It’s like with every topic: unfortunately today, if you do not create leverage, you do not get results. Every negotiation works this way.
First : my number-one answer is: if we can do SCAF, I am happy, with an ad-hoc governance.
Second : the Eurofighter, for me, is not the model. Ask the air force and Navy staff: would they prefer a Eurofighter or a Rafale? The answer is simple: they didn’t make the right product. So it is not a model of cooperation. They were in this “co–co–co…” model; there was no real leader, although the British had to be slightly more in the lead than the others. But the British are not with us today.
So that’s what I want to point out: it’s not cooperation I am questioning.
We can cooperate tomorrow, but I tell you: it has to be effective cooperation.
And once again, I repeat, I can do it alone, but it must be recognized by the others.
And that’s what I am asking.
I am not saying: “I want to be the boss because I am the best, and everyone else stand at attention.”
I would like the others to say: “Since we recognize that your skills are superior, because you’ve been working in this field with your company for over 70 years, and you’ve built all types of aircraft from the Ouragan to the Rafale, we give you the baton as leader, as architect, with these responsibilities…”
What I am asking is concrete. I say it loudly because no one else says it loudly.
And i am not saying our politicians don't understand it, but how do you enforce it ?
www.secretdefensev2.com
www.bfmtv.com
