Thursday, September 23, 2021

European Council president gave cold response to Aussie PM during meeting

The Advocate:

Australia firm in face of French sub anger

Prime Minister Scott Morrison has met with President Joe Biden on the sidelines of a UN meeting.

Australia is holding firm in the face of sustained European anger over a torn-up $90 billion French submarine contract that has sparked a major diplomatic rift.

Scott Morrison insists the nation needs nuclear-powered boats rather than conventional submarines French company Naval Group was enlisted to provide.

The French government claims it was blindsided by the announcement of the AUKUS pact between Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States.

But the prime minister indicated Australia earlier raised concerns about the suitability of the French submarines for the strategic situation in the Indo-Pacific.

"We have made it clear for some months that the capability of a conventional submarine, to operate in that environment which we now face, pose serious risks," he told reporters in New York on Wednesday.

"The environment that we're seeking to operate has changed. I don't think there's any dispute about that."

Mr Morrison said Australia had a firm view conventional boats would not be suitable.

"We took the decision that we have every entitlement to take. To protect Australia's interests and advance our national security," he said.

The submarine deal has cast a shadow over upcoming free-trade negotiations with the European Union.

The prime minister told European Council president Charles Michel that Australia wanted to work with the bloc in the Indo-Pacifc but received a frosty response.

"Thank you for your message but as you know for us transparency and loyalty are fundamental principles," Mr Michel said.

After the meeting with European representatives, Mr Morrison said free-trade negotiations were separate from the submarine deal.

"It's no easy thing to land a trade deal with Europe," the prime minister told reporters.

He said a 50-minute meeting with Mr Michel had assisted understanding of the submarine decision.

Trade Minister Dan Tehan said it was unlikely France would walk away from the negotiating table despite the AUKUS uproar.

Speaking ahead of the latest round of negotiations, Mr Tehan said it was in France's interest to sign the deal.

"The economic weight of the globe has shifted to the Indo-Pacific," he told the National Press Cub.

"This is where the most economic activity globally is taking place, and what the EU-Australia FTA does for Europe is to enable them to get that very important foothold.

"That doesn't mean it's not going to be hard-fought."

Mr Tehan will travel to Europe next week to meet EU trade representative Valdis Dombrovskis after stops in Indonesia, India and the United Arab Emirates.

"Ultimately, my hope is that when countries of the EU look at the hard reality of their national interest, they will see that it's important for them to conclude a deal with Australia," he said.

The minister said France had the right to express its anger over the submarine deal.

"If you put the boot on the other foot, I think Australia would be similarly disappointed," Mr Tehan said.

"But ultimately, in the end, I think what's going to be really important is that ability for us to be able to sit down and work through this issue."

The AUKUS pact could also include Australia hosting nuclear-powered submarines from the UK before construction starts.

Mr Morrison confirmed the possibility but said there ware no commitments yet.

"Being able to bring that capability to our region and to work with that, that provides training opportunities for Australians as well as we seek to build our capability," he said.


  1. From data available:
    US Virginia Class Nuklear Sub costs US$3.6 billion each (today's $)

    UK Astute Class Nuklear Sub costs US$2.5 billion each (today's $)

    Frenchie Suffren Baraccuda Class (diesel) costs US$1.8 billion each
    So For 12 subs this works out to be US$22 billion

    But the Projek Cost has reportedly Ballooned to US$66 billion for the 12 subs, or US$5.5 billion each, when it should be less than US$2 billion each.

    The price differential cannot be explained by weaponry alone, since all the subs from the 3 countries will be conventionally armed.

    No Wonder The Aussie Walked Away. Better to buy Anglo-Nuklear and Much Cheaper too.

    Memories of our Scorpenes with Jibby is Still Fresh.

    1. Blurred mfer, did u check why the Projek Cost has reportedly Ballooned to US$66 billion for the 12 subs, or US$5.5 billion each?


      So so simple. Just selectively c&p!

  2. There are thousands of Diggers buried in cemeteries in France , but the Frogs have forgotten.

  3. On top of the cliffs just 1/2 kilometer from Omaha beach lie row upon row of thousands of GI Graves, killed in action 6th of June 1944 and the days after that...I have been there.

    yup , the perfidious Yankees.

  4. ....Mr Macron tu racontes un gros mensonge.....

    The article below from Jan 2020 shows that The Whole World (except Frenchie? ha ha ha) was made well aware of Oz concerns about ballooning cost, capability and delivery time of the subs.

    $80bn future submarine program runs aground, again
    By: Stephen Kuper

    The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) has released a scathing review into the nation’s largest defence program – the $80 billion Attack Class submarine program – revealing myriad challenges to delivering the program, with serious concerns about the viability of the contract and Australia’s future submarine capability.

    It is the largest defence acquisition project in the history of the nation, but the apparently $50 billion project to replace the ageing Collins Class submarines with 12 regionally-superior submarines is in deep water.

    Concerns about cost, capability and delivery time frame are again making headlines following the release of a troubling report from the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) titled Future Submarine – Transition to design, building on the fallout from a fiery exchange at Senate estimates in late-2019.

    Future Submarine Program manager Rear Admiral Greg Sammut explained to the Senate estimates hearing that the 'out-turned' cost of Australia's future fleet of submarines was estimated to be around $80 billion – a figure frequently cited but subsequently rubbished by former defence minister Christopher Pyne and other Defence officials.

    Further compounding the costs associated with the acquisition is the continuing concerns about the capability of the proposed vessels, with many expressing, often vocally, concerns about the obsolescence of lead-acid batteries and the conventional power plant expected to power the vessels out to the 2080s.

    When then prime minister Malcolm Turnbull announced the DCNS, now Naval Group, conventionally-powered Shortfin Barracuda, now the Attack Class, as the successful design for the hotly contested SEA 1000 Future Submarine program in April 2016, it seemed as if the disastrous procurement of the Collins Class would be put aside.

    Now, the ANAO presents a different, yet concerning picture of Australia's largest defence project and while it isn't all bad news for the Attack Class program, pointed questions still need to be asked about the tactical and strategic viability and value-for-money of the conventionally-powered submarines into the future....

    1. So, blurred mfer have u truly digested the content of yr c&p?


      Still the fraud of the rooster?

      Ooop… YES. For been dealing with a blurred(?) dingo!

  5. ....Frenchie tu fais un faux spectacle...

    Australia’s concerns over French submarine deal known for years, documents show

    As early as September 2018, an independent oversight board had advised Australia to look at alternatives, an auditor-general report shows

    Australian parliamentary hearings and reports on the project also showed problems emerging even before construction had begun
    Reuters in Sydney
    Published: 22 Sep, 2021

    France should not have been surprised that Australia cancelled a submarine contract, as major concerns about delays, cost overruns and suitability had been aired officially and publicly for years, Australian politicians said.

    Paris has recalled its ambassadors from Canberra and Washington, saying it was blindsided by Canberra’s decision to build nuclear-powered submarines with the United States and Britain rather than stick with its contract for French diesel submarines.

    Yet as early as September 2018, an independent oversight board led by a former US Secretary of the Navy Donald Winter had advised Australia to look at alternatives, and questioned whether the project was in the national interest, a 2020 public report from the country’s auditor-general shows.

    1. Wakakakakaka…

      "former US Secretary of the Navy Donald Winter had advised Australia to look at alternatives, and questioned whether the project was in the national interest"

      1st - why should a former US Secretary of the Navy 'advised' on Oz navy project?

      2nd - to look at alternatives!

      Sabotaging with conflicts of interests? Wakakakaka…

      3rd - questioned whether the project was in the national interest

      US navy putting it's hands&legs in Oz military procurement! Wow… Oz macam Jap & SKorea!

  6. Pinoy Must be Regreting Kicking Bully Out of Subic Bay

    Philippines supports Australia nuclear sub pact to counter China

    MANILA, Sept 21 (Reuters) - The Philippines is backing a new defence partnership between the United States, Britain and Australia, hoping it can maintain the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific region, a view that contrasts sharply with some of its neighbours.

    1. Wakakakakaka…

      Wait till Duterte presidency expire lah!

      Then, again who is the successor!

      Blurred mfer, doing fascicle c&p AGAIN.

  7. This is What We Need To Counter, Otherwise Say Bye Bye to Southern and Eastern Seas...AUKUS or no AUKUS.

    Bully already has nuklear powered and weapon-ed subs in Hainan today, and even with AUKUS we won't see any Oz conventional weapon-ed subs for another 10 years.

    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.

    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.”

    China has built four Type 094 SSBNs, as well as two Type 094A variants, which feature several incremental upgrades. The hulls of the first Type 094s were laid down in the early 2000s and commissioned into the PLAN several years later. The most recent Chinese boomer to enter service was commissioned in April 2021 at a ceremony attended by President Xi Jinping. The same event witnessed a Type 075 landing helicopter dock (LHD) and a Type 055 destroyer—two of the PLAN’s most advanced surface combatants—officially join China’s growing fleet.

    The Type 094 (and Type 094A) carry up to 12 Julang-2 (JL-2) submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), each of which is believed to carry a single nuclear warhead and possess a range of between 7,200 and 9,000 kilometers (km). If launched from waters near China, the JL-2 would have sufficient range to strike nuclear states in the region, such as Russia and India, but would be unable to reach the continental United States. It could, however, threaten Guam, Hawaii, and Alaska.

    Although the Type 094 represents a notable improvement over China’s first SSBN, it suffers from significant shortcomings. The Type 094 is reported to be two orders of magnitude louder than current U.S. and Russian boomers, and according to the U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence, the Type 094 is noisier than the Delta III SSBN first launched by the Soviet Union in 1976. The Type 094A variant is believed to feature design improvements aimed at reducing the submarine’s detectability.

    China is currently working on its next generation of SSBNs, the Type 096, which could further strengthen the PLA’s sea-based nuclear deterrent. The Type 096 is expected to be armed with the JL-3 SLBM, which is not yet operational. The new SLBM is estimated to have a range exceeding 9,000 km and to potentially carry multiple warheads on multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs). By 2030, the DOD assesses that China could field up to eight SSBNs consisting of Type 094s and Type 096s operating concurrently.

    Efforts to enhance the SSBN program are part of a broader push by China to strengthen its nascent nuclear triad—the ability to launch nuclear weapons from land, sea, and air domains. Possessing a nuclear triad greatly enhances the survivability of a country’s nuclear deterrent and provides its military leaders with several different delivery options. In conjunction with a sizable and sophisticated arsenal of land-based missiles and an emergent air-based nuclear deterrent, China’s SSBN forces are bringing the country closer to possessing a full triad like those of the U.S. and Russian militaries.

    1. Blurred mfer, remember yr deterrent fart?

      Who causes & promotes that f*cked policy?

      Isn't that a probability that yr uncle Sam is projecting Oz as a strategic naval bastion point to front-loading any war to be far far away from Yankeeland via aukus?

      SKorea isn't a willing cannon folder as in the case of the Jap when war starts with China. Guam is a easy missile target due to its dot size. Oz is a continental size land mass where strategic weaponry sites can be a few thousands km apart. Not so easy to target all!

      But by partnering in aukus, Oz has inevitably bring the bricks down from a nuclear free South Pacific where Oz was one of the initiator & signed!

      The South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone (SPNFZ) Treaty, known as the Treaty of Rarotonga, bans the manufacture, possession, stationing, and testing of any nuclear explosive device in Treaty territories for which the parties are internationally responsible; it also bans the dumping of radioactive waste at sea.

  8. ....ça explose déjà.....

    France to send ambassador back to the United States

    Emmanuel Macron and Joe Biden have agreed that "open consultations" could have prevented the diplomatic row between Paris and Washington over a nuclear submarine deal.

    Biden admitted a lack of communication led to the diplomatic rift

    French President Emmanuel Macron will send his ambassador back to the United States next week, Macron's office announced on Wednesday.

    The decision was made after President Joe Biden recognized that Washington should have consulted France over a security pact with Australia, Macron's office said.

    Upon his return to the United States, the French ambassador will "have intensive work with senior US officials."

    1. Did u know what's the sweetener for the rooster?


  9. No ASEAN country kicked up a fuss when 5000 yo Bully built 12 nuclear subs with nuclear weapons and base them at our doorstep on Hainan island. We even revere them as DaGe. When they build military strongholds all over the Southern Seas and their ships intrude our Luconia Schoals we say ok no problem, come again 88 times. (But strangely Wee KHAT Siong say harmless internet cable repair ship tak boleh masuk satu kali pun, our national borders).

    But when Oz wants to build conventional subs in their home 10,000 km away we are suddenly afraid? Does Oz or any Anglophone country want our minyak and ikan in the Southern Seas?

    1. Blurred mfer, do fart with better lies lah!

      Where's the concrete proof that Luconia Shoal belong to m'sia?

      Which part of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea states so?

      Did yr uncle Sam support any clauses of UNCLOS?

      "Oz wants to build conventional subs in their home 10,000 km away we are suddenly afraid"

      Conventional subs Oz have but aging! & when did who suddenly afraid?

      Ooop… u, in yr wet dream!

      BTW, given a chance - Oz or any Anglophone country WOULD want our minyak and ikan in the Southern Seas!