Asian Politics

[Thorgalaeg]

Nobody talking about the new indo-pacific anti-sino anglo-saxon alliance and France government calling back ambassadors to US and Australia after Australia suddenly cancelled a contract to build 15 french subs because US gave them 8 nuclear ones?

it seems US-UK-Australia are going to be serious about China getting too strong. That would explain US suddenly fleeing from Afghanistan to not expend resources in secondary things.

Meanwhile EU should forget About USA and arm itself to the teeth.

 

[Drakle]

Nobody talking about the new indo-pacific anti-sino anglo-saxon alliance and France government calling back ambassadors to US and Australia after Australia suddenly cancelled a contract to build 15 french subs because US gave them 8 nuclear ones?

it seems US-UK-Australia are going to be serious about China getting too strong. That would explain US suddenly fleeing from Afghanistan to not expend resources in secondary things.

Meanwhile EU should forget About USA and arm itself to the teeth.

China stuff probably needs its own thread.

But in terms of Afghanistan, Osama Bin Laden basically did buy China 10 years of the US really not paying attention at all to China, and another ten years of distracted half attention (particularly the Trump years, which in terms of action were all over the place).

I don't mean by that, a war vs China. But North Korea probably wouldn't have had so free a hand, and likely wouldn't have gotten a nuclear breakout. While there would be a fair bit more US competition to the Chinese Belt and Road.

 

[Farm Boy]

We're not big enough to go it alone on this, and neither is the EU, from what I can tell.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Nobody talking about the new indo-pacific anti-sino anglo-saxon alliance and France government calling back ambassadors to US and Australia after Australia suddenly cancelled a contract to build 15 french subs because US gave them 8 nuclear ones?

I have difficulty working out quite why the French government is so upset.

The general rule in commerce is if you don't deliver on time and in budget, you lose the contract.

And the USA-UK-Australia arrangement poses no threat to France.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Moderator Action: Moved from Afghani thread

 

[bernie14]

I have difficulty working out quite why the French government is so upset.

The general rule in commerce is if you don't deliver on time and in budget, you lose the contract.

And the USA-UK-Australia arrangement poses no threat to France.

Why France is angry about the US and UK giving Australia nuclear-powered submarines

France stands to lose the equivalent of $65 billion US dollars from an existing deal to provide Australia with conventional, diesel-powered submarines.

The canceled deal with France, a major global weapons exporter, is expected to make a significant economic impact on the French defense sector. France also stands to lose out strategically in the Indo-Pacific, where the country holds significant interests.

My guess

 

[r16]

just coming from a blog or whatever that 65 billions above and over the Anglosaxon stuff includes 50 years of inflation over the lives of the subs . It apparenty scared a lot of Australians , suddenly occupying airwaves , these reports of high level meetings announced . Then subs , leading to stuff about WW lll just to break out . And it would be perfectly suitable for the Afghanistan thread , without entering public discussion territory , because it develops the way it does only because of the American debacle . Australians apparently have elections , apparently have invested some in ship building , they were orienting for big contracts and there is a limit on what they can sell to America , as every corporation wait for big money now that the war on terror scam has ended or whatever and it will be China . Macron , quite dejected , had to re-prove he was loyal to West and old new world order by declaring they might have killed some big lSIL dude back in August , apparently involved in the deaths of 5 American troops / contractors , possibly this year . Proves America is upto the challenges , Boris Johnson can cover the debacle of leaving the EU or whatever and Australia can spend its coins , gained by selling coal to the Chinese , ı think ...

 

[Kaitzilla]

China is building up a huge fleet.

They are also going big on nuclear weapon ICBM silos (from 20 -> 250).


Of course the USA is going to spread around nuclear subs to counter.

Did this leak out last week?
Uranium was moving in the market recently and I didn't know why.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/uranium-stocks-jump-as-reddits-wallstreetbets-goes-nuclear-11631538583

No, it isn't a conspiracy if federal reserve members are daytrading stocks with blatant corruption.
It is only criminal insider trading if you aren't in the club.
https://truthout.org/articles/eliza...-on-federal-reserve-officials-trading-stocks/


France got screwed

 

[EnglishEdward]

Why France is angry about the US and UK giving Australia nuclear-powered submarines

France stands to lose the equivalent of $65 billion US dollars from an existing deal to provide Australia with conventional, diesel-powered submarines.

The canceled deal with France, a major global weapons exporter, is expected to make a significant economic impact on the French defense sector. France also stands to lose out strategically in the Indo-Pacific, where the country holds significant interests.

My guess

Not getting 65 billion dollars that you were not previously getting for submarines that you have
not yet built is NOT a loss, it is simply the evaporation of an imaginary future revenue stream.

And I wonder what the Australian government told its people about that deal.

Did it really tell them that each and every Aussie taxpayer was going to be paying
3,000 dollars for French sardines of an as yet unfinished design specification?

Now I dare say the French may have have been very self satisfied in convincing
themselves that Australia was paying for all of their next round of conventional submarine
research and development, and on realisation it won't happen, are taking a sulk.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

The French had not to convince themselves of anything as there WAS a contract dating back to 2016, and the subs are already developed since they are a conventional version of the Barracuda nuclear sub, already built and in service with French navy.

Apparently the reason France is so upset is because it was done without informing them. They were backstabed according to Macron. On the other hand, contracts are broken continuously, France is expert in canceling defense contracts too, for instance they opted out from the eurofighter project. Usually some kind of compensation is paid by the withdrawing part in these cases. Don't know if Australia will have to pay penalties for resolving the contract.

The weird part is suddenly Australia needs nuclear subs instead of conventional ones and apparently only USA-UK can provide them, which is funny, having in mind the French design they were going to get, is in fact a nuclear sub which had to be converted to conventional propulsion to meet Australian requeriments. Now Australia will have to wait 20 years at least and probably pay way more than 65 billions to get his new nuclear subs when it could get the original Barracuda nuclear design which is already developed, getting them much sooner. The only option for Australia now is to lease some sub from UK or USA. Probably some ancient and less capable UK trafalgar class unit, as American ones are too big and expensive for Australia navy.

So the final result is no subs for anybody, NATO weakened, France selling subs to India instead (who will probably get his subs much sooner than Australia) and the fact we will never know the real motivations behind Australian decision.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Thank you for comments, @ Thorgalaeg.

I am waiting for our upside down Kangaroo commentators (where is
@ FriendlyFire and the various A.s.. when we need them) to contribute.

 

[amadeus]

The CCP is banning Taiwanese wax apple imports because of "harmful pests"

Taiwan's Council of Agriculture Minister Chen Chi-chung said China had behaved unilaterally without providing scientific evidence,
​

No!

The mainland government? Dishonest? Hiding evidence? I can hardly believe that what with their stellar track record and commitment to glasnost.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Australia could / should have informed the French they were considering US subs rather then announcing the deal was done
France should know that the submarine price increase and delays were making Australia reconsider the contract. From what I can gather the delays was the results of new French disel sub technology. with that came a massive cost blow out.
Australia is still going to pay hundreds of millions for breaking the contract.

France is overreacting, withdrawing the ambassadors to Au and the US. Things will return to normal after a while.

 

[EnglishEdward]

It is a funny sort of contract that allows the supplier to unilaterally put the price up and not deliver on time.

I suspect that the French people involved were told very well that if they didn't deliver on time and to cost
Australia could go elsewhere, but they didn't want to pass the bad news up the chain to President Macron.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Australia could / should have informed the French they were considering US subs rather then announcing the deal was done
France should know that the submarine price increase and delays were making Australia reconsider the contract. From what I can gather the delays was the results of new French disel sub technology. with that came a massive cost blow out.
Australia is still going to pay hundreds of millions for breaking the contract.

France is overreacting, withdrawing the ambassadors to Au and the US. Things will return to normal after a while.

Suffren-class submarines are de facto nuclear-engined. The fact to convert them to diesel engine was an Australian requirement. The other reason explaining extra costs was that Australia was requiring 60% of the production to be Australian-made. The weird thing is that both requirements no longer apply to the Americans, submarines being produced in the US with nuclear engines.

I think this Australian change of mind has been guided by the current diplomatic crisis the country has with China, which probably convinced them they should toughen their position in fully aligning to the US, something Americans would agree if they get control of the equipment. That's not the first time this happens, smaller European countries are frequently bullied by the US to buy F-35s, the latest example being Switzerland. So this is more a strategic move than anything else.

So this isn't just a mere commercial disputes, it's a strategical major change, particularly that it's been done in the back of France, without warning them. The US could have easily involve France in the deal but decided not to, showing clearly an intent to alienate France from the region. Weakening France from the region may not be so smart considering the country holds key positions with New Caledonia and French Polynesia in the Pacific Ocean and Mayotte and Reunion in the Indian Ocean. That strategic aspect easily justifies recalling Ambassadors to figure out what's going on.

The thing I fail to understand is that it seems there's a contradiction between that US move basically consisting in vassalizing the UK and Australia, and the Quad which was aimed at containing China in a security effort involving India and Japan. I can't see how such a violent betrayal of an old ally will help convince already reluctant India and Japan to get further involved. Maybe the change goes even beyond and the US are fully abandonning multilateralism to go in full Anglo-mode, it's difficult to say, but what is certain is that there is something serious going on.

 

[Gelion]

The thing I fail to understand is that it seems there's a contradiction between that US move basically consisting in vassalizing the UK and Australia, and the Quad which was aimed at containing China in a security effort involving India and Japan. I can't see how such a violent betrayal of an old ally will help convince already reluctant India and Japan to get further involved. Maybe the change goes even beyond and the US are fully abandonning multilateralism to go in full Anglo-mode, it's difficult to say, but what is certain is that there is something serious going on.

I don't think that the US cares as much about Europe any more, not after the shift of focus to the Pacific. India and Japan have to be US allies or be either neutral or allied to China. This will not happen, ambitions and old history (in case of Japan) will necessarily push them into any anti-China alliance regardless of how friendly or trustworthy it is. France and Europe in general are left to deal with the devastated Middle East and growing problems with Russia. I doubt that French dissatisfaction will turn them away from pursuing these two most important goals. Hence it might not look good, but there's very little room left for a manoeuvre.

 

[r16]

65 billions is not what the French would get , as per French claims on certain blogs , and it would be down to maybe 5 or 10 and that would seem reasonable . The essence of the whole thing is putting US Military bases in place through the need to train Australians in a field in which they have zero experience . This despite Australia being America's lovely little puppet . Down to deploying in Vietnam despite the British desire to see America to taste some colonial warfare above and beyond the otherwise little affairs in Philippinnes and the actual Banana Republics where Washington had held all the cards . Chinese of course claim basing nuclear weapons in Australia is the next step .

supposedly every party in the French Parliament except Macron's wants France to leave NATO and they will let not let Swiss military to fly over France . The Swiss were of course actually not bothering to fly air soverignity or whatever missions until this year and not paying the costs of French or ltalian or German planes that intercepted wayward Cessnas ... something they started doing this year because of the backstab they would provide to Paris by giving up on the Rafale in the last moment . You know , American pressure .

the rise of China leaves less bones to share , leading to dog eats dog ... Coming after the Franco-British war over letting New Turkey destroy the Middle East and who will get what . And ı have it on authority from people actually seen people in question in the flesh that the Dassault dynasty were anything but nice people , but Rafale was a better run programme than EFA and would have done much better than thd Typhoon , as it is actually kinda doing these days , but for the hugely expensive Mirage 2000 to be prioritized to make some profit .

a map stolen from somewhere and what ı wanna do , in equal measures for all , even if the health office bans the thing for health and ecological needs ...

Spoiler :

 

[uppi]

I don't think that the US cares as much about Europe any more, not after the shift of focus to the Pacific. India and Japan have to be US allies or be either neutral or allied to China. This will not happen, ambitions and old history (in case of Japan) will necessarily push them into any anti-China alliance regardless of how friendly or trustworthy it is. France and Europe in general are left to deal with the devastated Middle East and growing problems with Russia. I doubt that French dissatisfaction will turn them away from pursuing these two most important goals. Hence it might not look good, but there's very little room left for a manoeuvre.

If you push out Europe to the point where there is no strategic interest in containing China, some Europeans might start trading arms with China. There are now some subs which need a buyer.

 

[red_elk]

Mr. President, we must not allow a nuclear submarines gap!

 

[Farm Boy]

... violent betrayal...

Nah, that was murdering Ghaddaffi.

You're welcome?