Pages

Sunday, September 19, 2021

Mon Dieu La Perfide Anglo-Saxon



France Betrayed!! – How It Lost $70 Billion Submarine Deal To “Lies & Treason” Committed By Allies US, UK & Australia


France has learned the hard way how its allies and friends stabbed it in the back. It is so mad and furious that it has ordered the withdrawal of its ambassadors to the U.S. and Australia in an apparent protest against some secret backroom deals involving the United States, Australia and Britain to supply the Aussie with a fleet of at least eight nuclear-power submarines.



The secret deal, negotiated behind the French, would effectively scrap a deal worth US$66 billion signed in 2016 between Australia and France to build 12 conventional diesel-electric submarines. French foreign minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, said – “It’s really a stab in the back. We had established a relationship of trust with Australia, this trust has been betrayed.”


Meanwhile, France’s ambassador to Australia, Jean-Pierre Thébault, has accused his host country of having engaged in “lies and treason” for 18 months. Indeed, it’s hard to see why the French were so mad and angry over the betrayal, considering both nations have enjoyed diplomatic relations since 1944. It was not only about losing the deal, but the way it lost the deal.



First of all, the US$70 billion submarine deal was one of the biggest military deals that would contribute economic significance to France’s defence sector. In comparison, a landmark 2015 agreement between India and French company Dassault Aviation to supply 36 Rafale fighter jets was worth only US$9.4 billion, despite allegations of corruption and cronyism.



Second, France would lose strategically after Australian’s stunning cancellation of the 5-year-old deal in favour of America. When the French won the deal in 2016, the Government of France celebrated it as a strategic partnership – the “contract of the century” – between the two nations that will be working for the “next 50 years”. The project was supposed to create jobs in both countries.



The French also believed, clearly naively, that the U.S. would bless the deal because the Australian branch of Lockheed Martin, an American company, was expected to be involved in the project. But France finally realized now that even among allies, English-speaking countries would flock together. Worse, they had kept Paris in the dark while they secretly negotiated a plan to dump France.



When President Emmanuel Macron ordered the withdrawal of France’s ambassadors to both Australia and the United States on Friday (Sept 17), the decision speaks volumes about the escalating diplomatic problems between France and the U.S. along with its “deputy sheriff” in the Asia-Pacific region. This is the first time in history Paris had recalled its ambassadors from ally nations in such a manner.



The Australians reportedly had approached President Joe Biden right after his inauguration – without the knowledge of France – to ask for a new submarine deal. Canberra argued that the conventional powered French submarines would be obsolete by the time they were delivered. The Aussie wanted to abandon the French deal, which was already over budget and running behind schedule.



Canberra was interested to acquire a fleet of quieter and more powerful nuclear-powered submarines based on American and British designs that could patrol the South China Sea region without being detected easily. But if that’s true, exactly why had Australia agreed to purchase a dozen of obsolete submarines? It’s not like nuclear-powered submarines were invented last year.



Not only the Australians did not find it important to inform the French of their intention to cancel the submarine deal, but the Americans too did not give France a heads-up about their plans to replace the French submarines with their own designs. In fact, Washington and Canberra agreed to keep it secret because they were afraid Paris would try to sabotage the new deal.




Even when Joe Biden met with his French counterpart at the G7 Summit in June, the U.S. president did not tell President Macron, where they sat in lawn chairs by the sea in Cornwall, Britain, and talked about the future of the Atlantic alliance. Likewise, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken stayed silent on June 25 when French counterpart Jean-Yves Le Drian welcomed him to Paris.



As recently as August 30, when the French and Australian defence and foreign ministers held their annual “consultation”, they issued a joint statement that said the two countries were committed to deepening cooperation in the defence industry and “underlined the importance of the Future Submarine programme”. There was no mention of the submarine deal at all.



By that time, the Australians not only knew the project was dead, but they had nearly sealed the agreement with Washington and London, abandoning Paris in the process. So, when President Biden unveiled on Wednesday the new partnership and a submarine deal between the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom, all hell broke loose.



Therefore, the third and biggest reason for the French anger is the way the deal between Australia, Britain and the United States was announced – Paris knew about it through media reports. Prime Ministers Scott Morrison of Australia and Boris Johnson of the United Kingdom joined Biden virtually for the announcement of the partnership, an insult to Macron administration.



Before he was recalled, French envoy Thebault said he found out about the U.S. submarine deal “like everybody, thanks to the Australian press“. He said – “We never were informed about any substantial changes. There were many opportunities and many channels. Never was such a change mentioned”. TV and radio in France have been broadcasting angry comments.



Like Canberra, the French had condemned Washington – “The American decision, which leads to the exclusion of a European ally and partner like France from a crucial partnership with Australia at a time when we are facing unprecedented challenges in the Indo-Pacific region, be it over our values or respect for a multilateralism based on the rule of law, signals a lack of consistency which France can only notice and regret.”



In truth, Biden had engaged Australia and Britain for months, selling the idea of American and British made nuclear-powered submarines in its strategy to counter China. It wasn’t hard to convince Canberra that French submarines were limited in range and easy for the Chinese to detect. Still, this is not the correct way to treat a NATO ally.



In retaliation to the U.S.’ backstabbing, French officials in Washington have cancelled a Friday evening gala, which was slated to commemorate the 240th anniversary of the Battle of the Capes. A White House official said that the U.S. regrets France’s decision and will continue to be engaged in the coming days to resolve differences between the two countries.



The British, while acknowledging French “frustration”, has insisted Britain had not sought to disrupt Paris’ relationship with Canberra. The UK said – “We didn’t go fishing for these opportunities, fundamentally the Australians made a decision they wanted a different capability, We have no intention of doing anything to antagonise the French – the French are some of our closest military allies in Europe.”



Australia, on the other hand, said it regrets France’s decision of withdrawing its ambassador, adding that it values its relationship with France and will keep engaging with Paris on many other issues. It said – “We note with regret France’s decision to recall its Ambassador to Australia. We look forward to engaging with France again on our many issues of shared interest, based on shared values.”



9 comments:

  1. Scottie made the painful but BRAVE and CORRECT decision, as any responsible PM should do.

    Diesel powered subs are already obsolete and the decision to buy them by a previous PM was wrong. He had to correct it. Diesel subs are like choo choo trains when everyone else is on HSR. So Scottie bravely took it on the chin, suffer short-term pain with Frenchie rather than pass on a 50-year problem; useless subs that cost 90 billion. Kudos to Him.

    Now take the other example of another PM, our very own Jibby with diesel powered Scorpenes, with the very same Frenchie company DCNS. Everybody told him it was a stupid decision to buy obsolete tin cans 20 years ago but he went ahead anyway, for reasons we now know why. The two subs have done absolutely NOTHING for us in 20 years, 5000 yo Bullyland running riot all over the Southern Seas building military bases, pirates kidnapping tourists, while our Scorpenes are nowhere in sight, even though their base is close by in Sepanggar Sabah. So we are still stuck with two tin cans.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So simple a f*cked extrapolation for that subservient Scottie! This Scottie isn't that same Scottie of the Enterprise starship navigator fame!

      What would happen if an AK47 is given to a kid?

      Ooop… Oz ain't no kids but half-witted deranged young outcasts!

      The easiest analogy is rmn operating a nuclear submarine - ending up worst than the Scorpenes!

      Wakakakaka… Oz playing with tin canned nuclear subs in 2050 if they ever come on line of duty.

      Not even the current auntie pommie has that capabilities to manufacture &/or maintain a new generation nuclear sub. There are six fleet submarines on active duty – two Trafalgar and four Astute. They are all nuclear submarines and are classified as SSNs. The latest Astute class, Audacious, is launched in 2016 BUT face mounting manufacturing problems. The Ministry of Defence has told UK MPs that the delivery of Audacious, to the Faslane naval base near Helensburgh has been postponed from August 2019 to January 2021 after numerous previous postponements.

      But maybe uncle Sam would be very kind hearted to part with his out-of-commisioning 1st gen nuclear sub model to the Oz!

      But then can a deranged blurred mfer, who lies with know-nothingness outside its fart filled well, care?

      Delete
  2. In fact , the French submarine deal had been in trouble for months.
    $ 60 Billion had become $ 96 Billion.. the Aussies had been looking for a way out for months.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wakakakakaka…

      What causes the over budget & multiple delayings?

      R they the faults of the proud rooster or the undecisiveness of the half-witted dingo?

      Truly selective headline reading dickhead!

      Delete
  3. There are always more than one side to the story...the French were already screwing the Aussies over the submarine...

    Faux anger from France....


    https://www.theweek.in/news/world/2021/09/16/french-submarine-deal-with-australia-was-in-troubled-waters-before-auukus.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quick… go get some Francie stories about that Oz submarine deal before u make yr WASP indoctrinated neurons work overtime to prevent a BIG lie from yr big mouth!

      Remember yr fart - There are always more than one side to the story.

      Now, how about the stories from the rooster?

      Ooop… u DON'T read le français!!

      Delete
  4. Not Just Scorpenes......DCNS is mired in corruption scandals......

    QUOTE
    22 April 2018
    Australia’s Submarine Program: A Failure in Anti-Corruption Due Diligence?

    Australia is embarking on a naval building program, the largest undertaken since the Second World War. A significant aspect of that building program is the replacement of the current Collins class submarines, known as the Future Submarine Program. The estimated cost of building 12 new diesel electric submarines is $50 billion, not including the combat system.

    On 20 February 2015, the Australian Government announced that a competitive evaluation process (CEP) would be undertaken involving design concepts submitted by 3 submarine manufacturers namely; Direction de Constructions Navales Services (DCNS) of France; ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems GmbH (TKMS) of Germany and Mitsubishi of Japan. On 26 April 2016, the Australian Government announced that DCNS had been selected as the preferred partner to build the submarines.

    DCNS is now known as the Naval Group. It was previously DCN. Since 1997, DCNS has been involved in 5 major corruption scandals. Three of these events were known before the company was selected to design Australia’s submarines and two have come to notice since it was selected. Four of the incidents involve the supply of submarines or frigates to Taiwan, Pakistan, Malaysia and Brazil and the loss of information pertaining to the submarines the company is building in India. DCNS has denied any wrongdoing, but too many incidents have occurred to be ignored, and further information should be sought by the Australian Government about them and appropriate anti-corruption measures applied...
    UNQUOTE

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mon dieu ces français.....si corrompu.....!!

    DCN/Naval Group is TROUBLE. Jibby got caught with the Scorpene Scandal, Better for Oz To Stay Away From Them.

    https://www.malkaraconsulting.com/articles/2018/4/22/australias-submarine-program-a-failure-in-anti-corruption-due-diligence

    QUOTE
    Murder, corruption, bombings – the company at centre of Australia’s submarine deal
    By Michelle Fahy
    October 24, 2020

    The arms company at the centre of a deadly criminal saga and numerous global corruption scandals, Naval Group, was selected by the Australian government to build our new fleet of submarines – a deal heralded as ‘one of the world’s most lucrative defence contracts‘. How did this happen? In this special investigation Michelle Fahy discovers significant gaps in anti-bribery and corruption measures on this massive procurement project. The message communicated far and wide is that our standards are lax; grey areas are tolerated; and we’ll bend the rules and look the other way.

    A car packed with explosives drove into a bus of engineers in Karachi, Pakistan, in 2002, apparently in revenge for unpaid bribes, killing 15 people, including 11 employees of French shipbuilder DCN, now Naval Group.

    The French investigation into the bombing – known as the Karachi Affair – began in 2002 and uncovered a web of corruption that by 2010 appeared to involve then French president Nicolas Sarkozy.

    In June this year, 18 years later, a Paris court secured the first convictions in the case. Six men were found guilty of charges involving kickbacks on deals signed in 1994 for the sale of submarines to Pakistan and frigates to Saudi Arabia. They include three former French government officials and the former head of the International Division of Naval Group.

    Investigations into arms trade corruption take years, often more than a decade, due to multiple countries being involved, layers of offshore shell companies hiding the money trail, and the senior people implicated. Court cases and convictions are rare.

    The Karachi Affair resonates in Australia today because despite this high-profile and deadly criminal saga – and two other corruption scandals, in Taiwan and Malaysia, which also involved murder – the company at the centre of all three, Naval Group, was still selected by the Australian government in 2016 to build our new fleet of submarines. A deal heralded as “one of the world’s most lucrative defence contracts”. Naval Group is 62.25% owned by the French government and 35% by French multinational Thales (a global top 10 weapons-maker).

    The French case continues. In January, the former French prime minister Edouard Balladur and his defence minister will stand trial. It is alleged the kickbacks helped fund the PM’s failed 1995 presidential bid. Both men deny any wrongdoing.

    Meanwhile, in Australia, the submarine deal continues. In February last year, after two years of negotiations, the government signed a ‘strategic partnership agreement’ with Naval Group. The signing took place despite the emergence of two more investigations into Naval, including alleged corruption on a 2009 submarine deal with Brazil and a significant security breach where complete plans of the new Scorpène submarines Naval had provided to India were apparently leaked from within Naval.

    Back in 1994, the payment of “commissions” (aka bribes) was legal in France, although kickbacks certainly were not. Commissions were outlawed in 2000 when France signed the OECD’s anti-bribery convention (Australia signed in 1999). President Jacques Chirac stopped the bribe payments to Pakistan, which is thought to have led to the bombing. But clearly the anti-bribery message didn’t get through as Naval’s Malaysian and Brazilian deals were signed after 2000......(Scorpenes lah....my quote....)
    UNQUOTE

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Walau-eh… cesspool digging just to justify yr c&p urge!

      So what's new in ANY of these military hardware procurements?

      Rooster does it. Dingo too. So r yr uncle Sam & auntie pommie!

      Delete