Pages

Friday, September 17, 2021

Anglo Saxon nuclear sub pact upsets China, France, Europe etc





China, France denounce US nuclear sub pact with Britain, Australia

China on Thursday denounced a new Indo-Pacific security alliance between the United States, Britain and Australia, saying such partnerships should not target third countries and warning of an intensified arms race in the region.

Under the arrangement, dubbed Aukus, the United States and Britain will provide Australia with the technology and capability to deploy nuclear-powered submarines.

France, which loses its own submarine deal with Australia, called the plans brutal and unpredictable.

The United States and its allies are looking for ways to push back against China's growing power and influence, particularly its military buildup, pressure on Taiwan and deployments in the contested South China Sea.

US President Joe Biden, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison did not mention China by name in the joint announcement and senior Biden administration officials, who briefed reporters ahead of time, said the partnership was not aimed at countering Beijing.

But Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian said the three countries were "severely damaging regional peace and stability, intensifying an arms race and damaging international nuclear non-proliferation efforts".

"China always believes that any regional mechanism should conform to the trend of peace and development of the times and help enhance mutual trust and cooperation... It should not target any third party or undermine its interests," Zhao told a regular briefing in Beijing.


British Prime Minister Boris Johnson

Johnson said the pact was not meant to be adversarial and said it would reduce the costs of Britain's next generation of nuclear submarines.

"Now that we have created Aukus, we expect to accelerate the development of other advanced defence systems, including in cyber, artificial intelligence, quantum computing and undersea capabilities," Johnson told Parliament.

The partnership ends Australia's 2016 deal with French shipbuilder Naval Group to build it a new submarine fleet worth US$40 billion to replace its more than two-decades-old Collins submarines, a spokesperson for Morrison told Reuters.

France accused Biden of stabbing it in the back and acting like his predecessor Donald Trump.

"This brutal, unilateral and unpredictable decision reminds me a lot of what Mr Trump used to do," Le Drian told franceinfo radio. "I am angry and bitter. This isn't done between allies."

The three leaders stressed Australia would not be fielding nuclear weapons but using nuclear propulsion systems for the vessels to guard against threats.

"We all recognise the imperative of ensuring peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific over the long term," Biden said.

"We need to be able to address both the current strategic environment in the region, and how it may evolve because the future of each of our nations, and indeed the world, depends on a free and open Indo-Pacific enduring and flourishing in the decades ahead," he said.

Morrison said Australia would meet all its nuclear non-proliferation obligations.

'Strong role'

One US official said the partnership was the result of months of engagements by military and political leaders during which Britain - which recently sent an aircraft carrier to Asia - had indicated it wanted to do more in the region.


New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern welcomed the focus on the Indo-Pacific but said Australia's nuclear-powered submarines would not be allowed in its territorial waters.

Singapore said it had long had relations with Australia, Britain and the United States and hoped their grouping would contribute to peace and stability.

Japan said the three countries' strengthening of security and defence cooperation was important for peace and security.

A US official briefing before the announcement said Biden had not mentioned the plans "in any specific terms" to Chinese leader Xi Jinping in a call last Thursday, but did "underscore our determination to play a strong role in the Indo-Pacific".

US officials said nuclear propulsion would allow the Australian Navy to operate more quietly, for longer periods and provide deterrence across the Indo-Pacific.

EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said the new partnership, on which the EU was not consulted, showed the need for a more assertive European foreign policy.

"We must survive on our own, as others do," Borrell said as he presented a new EU strategy for the Indo-Pacific region. "I understand the extent to which the French government must be disappointed."

Biden said the three governments would launch an 18-month consultation period "to determine every element of this programme, from the workforce to training requirements, to production timelines" and to ensure full compliance with non-proliferation commitments.

Among the US firms that could benefit are General Dynamics Corp and Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc.

General Dynamics' Electric Boat business does much of the design work for US submarines, but critical subsystems such as electronics and nuclear power plants are made by BWX Technologies Inc

US officials did not give a time frame for when Australia would deploy a nuclear-powered submarine, or how many would be built.

A US official said Washington had shared nuclear propulsion technology only once before - with Britain in 1958.

"This is frankly an exception to our policy in many respects... We view this as a one-off."

- Reuters

13 comments:

  1. Frenchie very upset I can understand because they lost kontrak, but why is Europe/EU upset?

    Did EU consult Oz on NATO defences in Europe over the last 50 years? No, because it is none of Oz business. So why is EU now so kaypoh over Indo Pacific defences?

    Didn't EU appreciate the bodyguard services provided by 500 yo Bully all these years with NATO to counter USSR/Rusia? But now there is another Bully in Asia, so why can't 500 yo Bully do the same and give bodyguard services there? Only NATO/EU deserve bodyguard services issit?

    Didn't EU say "good riddance" and "you have to look after yourself now" after Brexit? So now why upset with Britannia for going their own way?

    By the way 5000 yo Bullyland oredy has nuclear subs. Did anyone complain? Is anyone complaining or worried about this while they Bully and Rampas islands all over the place?

    And finally who needs diesel subs these days? They are OBSOLETE. They are easy to detect and destroy. So why spend 50 billion for a fleet of subs to be delivered over the next 30 years that use technology that is oredy obsolete today?

    P/S look what happened to Jibby's Scorpenes...ha ha ha...scrapheap. No sign of them since Day 1.

    Go straight to nuclear power subs, they are almost impossible to detect. In fact I am disappointed that Oz don't go all the way and arm the subs with clear missiles as well.

    We need counterbalance in Indo Pacific. Just like NATO was and is in Europe against Rusia. Bully must be confronted by another Bully. There is No Other Way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Truly blurred mfer parading its farts on issues it knows not!

      "why is Europe/EU upset?"

      Mfer, it's a series of betrayals done by a supposedly "friend" in making unilateral bad decisions affecting the WHOLE pact!

      This is definitely no trusted friend to be counted in time of needs.

      "bodyguard services provided by 500 yo Bully all these years with NATO to counter USSR/Rusia"

      How about to provide such bodyguard services all-over the world so that NO WARS could ever happen in Yankee backyard! These bodyguard services r designed to bandwagon any possible wars to spread into the North America continent!

      & the EU, NATO, SKorea, Japan etc know & yet can't do anything about! They were/r the sacrificial cannon fodders to keep yankeeland free from possible raging wars.

      But can a well dwelling mfer understands the intricacies of international politics.

      Similarly wrt nuclear submarine design/operate/maintain.

      Have u ever come across yr f*cking mind why pommieland has stagnated in her nuclear submarine project? Money is part of the problem. The others r the rigid requirements of MODERN nuclear submarine in operational/maintainable. Ever since that old bitch Thatcher destroyed the heavy industrial power of pommieland, UK has declined in all things of large scale industrial developments.

      Can't built/design modern nuclear power stations. Can't overcome designs & operationally handicaps with the qeII aircraft carrier, resulting in over budget & delays.

      Ditto with WHY Oz can't design/built nuclear submarine in the first thought when signing multi-millions contract with France to buy 'desel' submarines!

      "By the way 5000 yo Bullyland oredy has nuclear subs. Did anyone complain? Is anyone complaining or worried about this while they Bully and Rampas islands all over the place?"

      China's nuclear submarines r 200% homegrown - design, built & maintain with proven & outstanding performance records.

      So who should care like u, a mfering katak, jumping up&down shouting know nothing farts to chant yr demoNcratic jingos - especially when the Chinese r "maintaining" their back garden!

      "We need counterbalance in Indo Pacific. Just like NATO was and is in Europe against Rusia"

      Such a simplemindedness in that fraud DETERRENCE principle championed by yr uncle Sam. Such a deeply rooted yankee indoctrination making a already f*cked Richard totally unable to catechize that underlying Yankee catchphrase!

      Deterrence has costed the confronting NATO/COMECON a prolonged confrontation that delayed peaceful & economic dialogues that were vital to the coexisting of different idealism on motherhood Earth.

      Deterrence didn't work in N/S Vietnam wars. Neither in N/S Korean war!

      It was never meant to work for peace & harmonic coexistence.

      It's yr uncle Sam's single-mindedness in parading his egotistic military hegemony & building possible warfronts far far away from yankeeland!

      Blurred mfer, keeps that thought in yr petrified mind the next time u chant "There is No Other Way".

      Delete
  2. 5000 yo Bully talk like they are the only one allowed to rule the land and seas in Asia. They now have the largest standing army and largest naval fleet in the world. All this for Peace and Stability? Smoking too much Opium I think.

    They are repeating what Yapan did in the 1920s and 30s, as they expanded their dominance using military might all over Asia. We must not let history repeat itself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just say u r deeply indoctrinated with Yankee hegemonic military idealism that ABSOLUTELY no one could be an equal in his military/finance/scientific mights!

      So simple & yet going through all these conspiracies about China wants to rule the land and seas in Asia!

      "We must not let history repeat itself"

      Wakakakakakaka…

      Never in the history of China, even during the period when she was the ONLY superpower of the world, has China ever invaded/conquered ANY territories that were not her in the first place!

      Unlike yr auntie pommie/uncle Sam!

      Oooop… u can continue with yr recalcitrant cries of Tibet/Xinjiang/Inner Mongolia etc etc. These lies keep yr boring live that much bearable!

      Delete
  3. France has the right to be upset at the sudden change of plans, because of the huge commercial implications of the cancellation of the existing submarine deal.

    Europe upset ? That part doesn't have much standing. EU foreign policy in East Asia, especially under German leadership, is chiefly driven by commercial priorities with China.

    China denounce ?
    China should fuxking stop interfering with Australia's internal affairs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Europe upset!

      U bet yr underpants.

      Besides yr farted "huge commercial implications" how about trust between supposedly alliances watching each other's back?

      Oooop… old moneyed mfer can't see further than that dollar sign.

      Trust?

      Friends watching out for each others?

      Not once in a blue moon - that's a 100% sure fart.

      Delete
  4. Did the EU or NATO consult with Oz or anyone in Asia for that matter, before they deployed these nuclear weapons all over Europe?

    If No....then why they so upset about not being consulted about security and defences in Asia Pacific?

    QUOTE
    The United States and its NATO allies do not disclose exact figures for its European-deployed stockpiles. In 2021, it is estimated that there are 100 U.S.-owned nuclear weapons stored in five NATO member states across six bases: Kleine Brogel in Belgium, Büchel Air Base in Germany, Aviano and Ghedi Air Bases in Italy, Volkel Air Base in the Netherlands, and Incirlik in Turkey...

    ....The total number of nuclear weapons based in Europe reached an all-time peak of 7,300 during the height of Cold War tensions in 1971. The 98% reduction to today’s stockpile reflects the end of Cold War hostilities as well as shifting American defense priorities. The weapons are an important symbol of the U.S.’ longstanding security commitments to Europe....
    UNQUOTE

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wakakakakaka…

      How terbalik can yr blurred f*cking mind be?

      US is a supposedly trusted "taiko" within NATO.

      Oz isn't in any way related to European affairs even when his grandauntie pommie was part of the EU!

      Nuclear submarine is a moving nuclear target - as lethal as an out-of-controlled nuclear power station meltdown when been hit!

      Definitely no country wants such a potential moving Chernobyl anywhere near its home ground - vis-a-vis New Zealand open declaration of not allowing any nuclear powered equipments dock at her coast.

      Yet when US teams up with pommie & dingo to form aukus, NATO is thrown to the air! Has yr uncle Sam forgotten his role in NATO? As a closed allie, the Yankee owe Eu/NATO an explicit explanation well before signing on the document. Yet they r been ignored as of zilch consequences!

      "The 98% reduction to today’s stockpile reflects the end of Cold War hostilities as well as shifting American defense priorities"

      Where do u fabricated that 98% US nuclear weapon stockpile?

      Tell u the true - atomic/hydrogen bombs have limited shelf life. Due to the precise control of the fission/fusion critical core mass & the natural decaying of the ignition nuclear core, the typical "working" life of these weapons r just under 30+ yrs. After that, these bombs have to be recommissioned with new nuclear core & control electronic ignition mechanism.

      There r multiple problems in recommissioning these aging warheads.

      1st how to deal with the decommissioned nuclear cores which r still radioactively toxic but can't initiate the expected nuclear reaction. US always store them in underground bunkers in remote Arizona desert or more recently the atolls around Diego Garcia in South Indian ocean.

      2nd, acquisition of new uranium source for nuclear weaponry is getting more difficult due to limited mines that could be controlled.

      Well… enuff said!

      U just don't understand international military intricacies! All u understand is pure know-nothing c&p fart!

      Delete
  5. Such Hypocrisy.

    Chernobyl and Fukushima incidents have shown that nuclear power plants endanger lives and the environment way beyond national boundaries. Nuclear power plants are usually built near highly populated areas where power is needed.

    Nuclear powered submarines pose far less risk.

    In France today there are 56 nuclear reactors for power generation. This despite their neighbour Germany is shutting down all of theirs.

    As of June 2021 China has 50 nuclear reactors in operation, and another 16 more under construction.

    Oz has ZERO.

    Did France or China consult anyone in Asia before building the Taishan nuclear plant in Southern China?

    In July 31, 2021, China General Nuclear Power Group (CGN), which operates the Taishan nuclear power plant in Guangdong with French partner EDF, said on Friday it would shut down one of the reactors at the facility because of "damaged fuel rods".....even the French were concerned.....

    France conducted nuclear testing in South Pacific, without consulting Oz, NZ or anyone else living in the region.

    QUOTE
    France undertook nuclear weapon tests between 1966 and 1996 at Moruroa and Fangataufa, causing international protests, notably in 1974 and 1995. The number of tests performed has been variously reported as 175 and 181.
    UNQUOTE

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wakakakakaka…

      "Nuclear powered submarines pose far less risk"

      Shout that to NZ for yr know-nothingness!

      On 27 January 1996, the last nuclear test explosion by France was conducted at the Moruroa and Fangataufa Atoll test site in the South Pacific.

      Due to nuclear stockpile aging France has since had her nuclear weaponry reduced significantly.

      But the worst is yr auntie pommie's house stock. Unable to manufacture new replenishments due to collapse of her nuclear industry!

      Of course, absolutely no nuclear power country would admit to this open secret.

      Delete
  6. Bullyland's Nuclear Submarine Fleet Based in Southern Hainan, doorstep to the Southern Seas.....Asian countries have every right to deter and defend against 5000 yo Bully, just like Europe does against Rusia. And France must surely understand diesel choo choo subs are no match against PLA Navy.

    QUOTE
    https://www.military.com/daily-news/2021/09/15/us-will-help-australia-build-nuclear-submarines-china-looms.html

    ..The Chinese navy has built 12 nuclear subs over the past 15 years, according to the Defense Department's last annual China report in 2020. Its four operational Jin-class subs can launch ballistic missiles and represent the country's "first credible sea-based nuclear deterrent."

    President Xi Jinping ordered faster growth of China's nuclear-powered ballistic missile sub fleet, and a next-generation sub to be constructed in the early 2020s could carry a new type of ballistic missile, the department reported....
    UNQUOTE

    QUOTE
    https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3131873/chinas-new-nuclear-submarine-missiles-expand-range-us-analysts

    China’s new nuclear submarine missiles expand range in US: analysts
    JL-3 ballistic missile can deliver multiple warheads – including nuclear – 10,000km, navy source says
    Minnie Chan
    2 May, 2021

    China’s newly commissioned nuclear-powered submarine is armed with the country’s most powerful submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) capable of hitting the US mainland, according to a military source and analysts.

    The Type 094A, or Jin-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine (SSBN), was presented last Friday as part of the celebration to mark the 72nd anniversary of the PLA Navy. It was capable of firing the JL-3, or Julang (Big Wave) SLBM with a range over 10,000km (6,200 miles), a source close to the navy said.
    UNQUOTE

    QUOTE
    https://www.csis.org/analysis/glimpse-chinese-ballistic-missile-submarines
    A Glimpse of Chinese Ballistic Missile Submarines
    August 4, 2021

    Tucked away on the southern edge of Hainan Island sits one of China’s most important military facilities—Yulin Navy Base. Located near the beachfront resorts of picturesque Sanya, the eastern portion of the base houses China’s fleet of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), commonly known as “boomers.” Unlike aircraft carriers, destroyers, and other large surface vessels, submarines spend much of their time out of sight, making them much harder to track and analyze.

    Commercial satellite imagery from July 8, 2021, captured one of China’s Type 094 Jin-class SSBNs returning to port at Yulin. Although partially obscured by clouds, at least one other Type 094 is also visible at the submarine facilities. Clearer imagery from July 15, shows two Type 094s—along with two Type 093 nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs)—docked along four piers, which are protected by a nearby surface-to-air missile site.1

    The Type 094 is the only vessel in the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) dedicated to launching nuclear weapons. According to the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), the platform represents China’s “first credible sea-based nuclear deterrent.”
    UNQUOTE

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wakakakaka…

      Still buying yr Yankee invented deterrence dogma!

      Blurred mfer, deterrence strategy depends on military might & it's a positive feedback chain reaction played on all parties concerned.

      No one wins but the cold blooded weaponry merchants!

      US promotes deterrence bcoz of his vast number of interested military weaponry manufacturets, besides his egoistic self-proclaimed policeman (butcher) of the world!

      Delete
  7. "They are repeating what Yapan did in the 1920s and 30s, as they expanded their dominance using military might all over Asia"

    You know why you are wrong? You are using your "Ang-mou" educated brain to understand and explain something Chinese! The philosophy is so vastly different. Since the unification of old China by the Chin Dynasty, China had never once invaded another country unless that country first intruded into China territory. After WWII, China had resolved its land boundaries with 12 other neighbouring countries peacefully without any arms conflicts. China does not intend to and will not want to rule the world. It only want to co-exist with everybody peacefully.

    ReplyDelete