Australia Navy Australia SSN Program

[OPTIMUS]

This order actually goes back to 2011. It was about $ 128 billion. In addition to the submarines, the order also included warships. The bidders at the time were French DCNS, German Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems and the Japanese alliance Mitsubishi / Kawasaki Heavy Industries.

The Germans had made a very good offer. The submarines and ships would be built in Australia, for which TKMS would be offered a long-term factory in Australia with 3000 workers

All expectations were that the German TKMS would receive the order. To be honest, mine too. But fans everywhere spread false reports so that German companies would be spared the Chinese. In the end, the order went to the DSCNs.

But it must be mentioned that the best of three submarines was the Japanese SORYU class for Australia. Still, the expectations for the Germans were up.

then what was not allowed to happen happened. the French submarine blueprints were on the Internet. 22,400 pages Date: 08/24/2016. Was that German revenge?

Fransosen have switched to BARRACUDA. Slightly smaller version.

Französischer Rüstungskonzern offenbar Opfer von großem Datenleck | Tiroler Tageszeitung Online

Sydney (APA/AFP) - Der französische Kriegsschiff- und U-Boot-Bauer DCNS ist offenbar Opfer eines großen Datenlecks geworden. Die australisch...

www.tt.com

INDUSTRIEMAGAZIN | Milliardenauftrag: Waffenkonzern DCNS: Papiere zum neuen U-Boot gestohlen

Thyssenkrupp hat sich vergeblich um diesen Milliardenauftrag bemüht: Der französische Waffenbauer DCNS bekam den Zuschlag und liefert nun U-Boote an…

industriemagazin.at

Datenleck bei DCNS bedroht U-Boot-Deal mit Australien

Ein französischer Konzern schnappte Thyssen-Krupp den weltgrößten Auftrag für U-Boote in Australien weg. Nun tauchen Baupläne französischer Boote im Internet auf. Betroffen ist nicht nur Australien.

www.faz.net

what really hurt the French : the Australian prime minister had assured French President Emmanuel Macron two months ago that he was sticking to the contract - only to call it off on Wednesday. This is all the more annoying for the French when they wanted to offer nuclear-powered boats in 2016, but the Australians deliberately refrained from doing so.

 

[Test7]

France recalls its ambassadors to the U.S. and Australia to protest Biden’s submarine deal.

France announced on Friday that it was immediately recalling its ambassadors to the United States and Australia in protest of President Biden’s announcement of an agreement to provide nuclear-powered submarines to Australia without consulting French officials.

In a statement, the French foreign minister said the decision was made by President Emmanuel Macron.

“At the request of the President of the Republic, I have decided to immediately recall our two ambassadors to the United States and Australia to Paris for consultations,” said Jean-Yves Le Drian, the foreign minister. “This exceptional decision is justified by the exceptional gravity of the announcements made on 15 September by Australia and the United States.”

The decision by Mr. Macron deepened the rift between the two longstanding allies over the submarine deal, which American and Australian officials kept secret from the French until just before the announcement on Wednesday.

In the statement announcing that the ambassadors would return temporarily to Paris — a severe diplomatic step that is usually used against adversaries — Mr. Le Drian made it clear that his country saw the actions of the two nations as a serious breach of trust.

He said the U.S.-Australia partnership, which will result in the abandonment of a previous submarine agreement between Australia and France, constitutes “unacceptable behavior between allies and partners, the consequences of which affect the very conception we have of our alliances, our partnerships and the importance of the Indo-Pacific for Europe.”

That language echoed the bitter comments from Mr. Le Drian and other French officials on Thursday, suggesting that the anger felt at the top levels of Mr. Macron’s government was more than a fleeting temper tantrum.

American officials have conceded that they first informed the French on Wednesday morning, hours before Mr. Biden’s announcement of the deal. They also said that top American officials had tried, unsuccessfully, to schedule meetings with their French counterparts before news of the deal leaked in the Australian and American press.

In a briefing with reporters on Friday before the recall announcement by the French government, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, downplayed the damage to the relationship between the two countries.

“As the president said, we cooperate closely with France on shared priorities both in the Indo-Pacific region and we’ll continue to do so here in the Security Council,” she said. “Good friends have disagreements, but that’s the nature of friendship and that’s — because you’re friends, you can have disagreement and continue to work on those areas of cooperation.”

She added: “We will continue to work with our French colleagues on areas of cooperation and address any tensions in our relationship, but we don’t see those tensions changing the nature of our friendship.”

But the move by the French to recall their ambassador to the United States, Philippe Étienne, in order to consult with other officials about the American decision is the kind of step usually taken to punish another country, signaling a bad relationship.

In March of this year, Russia recalled its ambassador to the United States after Mr. Biden said in an interview that President Vladimir V. Putin would “pay a price” for interference in the 2020 presidential election. Mr. Biden also agreed that Mr. Putin was a “killer.”

Biden administration officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the French decision to recall their ambassador.

Furious Over Sub Deal, France Recalls Ambassadors to U.S. and Australia (Published 2021)

It is the first time in the long history of the French-U.S. alliance that a top diplomat has been recalled, illustrating the depth of France’s anger.

www.nytimes.com

 

[F-6 enthusiast]

Not only is this embarassing for France but Australia is still going to pay a hefty sum for the cancelled contract.

Our politicians are stupid in Australia. If were going to get diesel powered subs we should have gone to the Germans. If we were going to buy nuclear powered get a American or a British nuclear powered submarine.

Its just retarded 180 turns.

12 diesel subs + ToT for 90 billion USD ? Bruh no offence, but the taxpayer being ripped off. Too much money for diesel subs.
Whatever be the case , now AUS has signed onto a better deal with US+UK.
Nuclear Submarine Tech is very sensitive, i think US UK AU will sign some sort of intelligence sharing treaty to safeguard the secrets. The reason why france is excluded from this agreement ?

The french will be willing to sell almost everything to anyone willing to pay the price. Sometimes even to their enemies. The US UK wouldn't want this tech from reaching the hands of countries they don't completely trust, even some of their allies. Serves them right lol

 

[Lonewolf]

12 diesel subs + ToT for 90 billion USD ? Bruh no offence, but the taxpayer being ripped off. Too much money for diesel subs.
Whatever be the case , now AUS has signed onto a better deal with US+UK.
Nuclear Submarine Tech is very sensitive, i think US UK AU will sign some sort of intelligence sharing treaty to safeguard the secrets. The reason why france is excluded from this agreement ?

The french will be willing to sell almost everything to anyone willing to pay the price. Sometimes even to their enemies. The US UK wouldn't want this tech from reaching the hands of countries they don't completely trust, even some of their allies. Serves them right lol

As much as I compile from my memory , France is one of few nation trust worthy enough rn . Also barracuda is basically a golden bird , and 90 billion was life cycle cost , including full tot etc and the submarine design is basically one of best three currently so this amount was worth it .

Aussie already have two partnership with US for intelligence sharing , and reactor tech is not a big deal to be shared if you got buck , Russia helped India in ssbn reactor

 

[HTurk]

Can somebody please enlighten me, why the French proposal would have cost 90 B USD, if it had been materialized?

//edit

I see that @Lonewolf gave some answers but it's hard to believe that the French were willing to share "full TOT"... Are you sure?

 

[Lonewolf]

Can somebody please enlighten me, why the French proposal would have cost 90 B USD, if it had been materialized?

//edit

I see that @Lonewolf gave some answers but it's hard to believe that the French were willing to share "full TOT"... Are you sure?

It wasn't ssn but ssk .

Also deal involved nurturing Aussie industry as they aren't big chap in defense , deal was a long term plan for Australia to gain best of technology including pump jet , aip (a little unsure ) etc for their future plans .

Also vessel are quite big compared to any other ssk .

If the deal went ahead , Australia might get something that others take decades to achieve .

Also facility for construction and naval port etc for ssk were included as per some french I know .

And inflation was added to it as project was more than decade and half long

 

[Glass🚬]

canzuk forming slowly and steadily while the eu falls into irrelevance.

The Aukus pact is a sign of a new global order | Rana Mitter

The deal has upset China, but it also binds the US into European security, in a world where Nato may be less relevant, says China expert Rana Mitter

www.theguardian.com

as predicted

 

[RogerRanger]

It was naive to think we could make major business in the military sector with a country of the "five eyes". It was bound to happen to be honest.

I know this will seem strange, me being English and all. However French is in reality Britain's best and most devoted ally over the past 170 years. They Americans have betrayed us over and over again, the French may have been defeated in wars, but they never actually betrayed Britain. And a UK/France marriage, would be the second most powerful, independent power in the world today.

I would be much more in favour of this deal for Australia if it was a joint UK/France deal with Australia. I don't want to be consumed by the Americans.

 

[RogerRanger]

Good decision. The anglosphere of Aus-UK-US is a special alliance and a EU-centric France wasn’t a natural partner for this level of spending. The money will now maintain the relationships that matter most … The French can concentrate on sales to the Arabs and Greeks. Putting my Turkish hat on, I envy Australia, they are building one hell of a navy.

The French has as much territory in the Pacific and close to Australia as the Americans do. The French should matter in the Pacific and Indian ocean, but they don't. They want strategic partners in these regions, it is a big blow for them. Not a good sign from my point of view, I want Britain and France to be strong and push the Americans out. Of course the British government which is either bought by the China/owned by the Americans/ideologically in love with the EU doesn't see it. France is our natural and best ally in the world today.

 

[RogerRanger]

France recalls its ambassadors to the U.S. and Australia to protest Biden’s submarine deal.

France announced on Friday that it was immediately recalling its ambassadors to the United States and Australia in protest of President Biden’s announcement of an agreement to provide nuclear-powered submarines to Australia without consulting French officials.

In a statement, the French foreign minister said the decision was made by President Emmanuel Macron.

“At the request of the President of the Republic, I have decided to immediately recall our two ambassadors to the United States and Australia to Paris for consultations,” said Jean-Yves Le Drian, the foreign minister. “This exceptional decision is justified by the exceptional gravity of the announcements made on 15 September by Australia and the United States.”

The decision by Mr. Macron deepened the rift between the two longstanding allies over the submarine deal, which American and Australian officials kept secret from the French until just before the announcement on Wednesday.

In the statement announcing that the ambassadors would return temporarily to Paris — a severe diplomatic step that is usually used against adversaries — Mr. Le Drian made it clear that his country saw the actions of the two nations as a serious breach of trust.

He said the U.S.-Australia partnership, which will result in the abandonment of a previous submarine agreement between Australia and France, constitutes “unacceptable behavior between allies and partners, the consequences of which affect the very conception we have of our alliances, our partnerships and the importance of the Indo-Pacific for Europe.”

That language echoed the bitter comments from Mr. Le Drian and other French officials on Thursday, suggesting that the anger felt at the top levels of Mr. Macron’s government was more than a fleeting temper tantrum.

American officials have conceded that they first informed the French on Wednesday morning, hours before Mr. Biden’s announcement of the deal. They also said that top American officials had tried, unsuccessfully, to schedule meetings with their French counterparts before news of the deal leaked in the Australian and American press.

In a briefing with reporters on Friday before the recall announcement by the French government, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, downplayed the damage to the relationship between the two countries.

“As the president said, we cooperate closely with France on shared priorities both in the Indo-Pacific region and we’ll continue to do so here in the Security Council,” she said. “Good friends have disagreements, but that’s the nature of friendship and that’s — because you’re friends, you can have disagreement and continue to work on those areas of cooperation.”

She added: “We will continue to work with our French colleagues on areas of cooperation and address any tensions in our relationship, but we don’t see those tensions changing the nature of our friendship.”

But the move by the French to recall their ambassador to the United States, Philippe Étienne, in order to consult with other officials about the American decision is the kind of step usually taken to punish another country, signaling a bad relationship.

In March of this year, Russia recalled its ambassador to the United States after Mr. Biden said in an interview that President Vladimir V. Putin would “pay a price” for interference in the 2020 presidential election. Mr. Biden also agreed that Mr. Putin was a “killer.”

Biden administration officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the French decision to recall their ambassador.

Furious Over Sub Deal, France Recalls Ambassadors to U.S. and Australia (Published 2021)

It is the first time in the long history of the French-U.S. alliance that a top diplomat has been recalled, illustrating the depth of France’s anger.

www.nytimes.com

Its interesting and I could be wrong here, but France hasn't really spoken about Britain, they have given it to the Australians and Americans. They have left Britain out of it. This is either because they don't think Britain matters or because they see Britain as a key strategically vital ally moving forward. I think the French are very aware of what's going on in the world and needed to make sure the relationship with Britain is positive after Brexit.

 

[BordoEnes]

I understand that the program has been troubled by delays and increased costs, alongside cultural differences that made it worse. Personally I wouldn't go as far as calling it a betrayal, but it was inappropriate among supposedly international allies. This is the single biggest contract that France signed, of course they would want a cut of that deal even if it falls apart. This is just plain politics, you win some you lose some.

This is probably going to happen more and more. You can see this as a defeat or an opportunity. The US is shifting its resources and focus towards Chinese containment, which means that NATO countries are more freely able to purse their own interests. Turkey is already doing this to some extent, never really going against NATO directly but still independent policies and goals. France could start doing this aswell.

 

[RogerRanger]

My guess is the Australians will either endup with a American reactor in a British Astute variant design. Built in Australia. Which will be the most capable sub of any Indo-Pacific nation. But it will take 10 years to get into service.

Or a totally new Australia design, which will likely be smaller and less complex than the British and American subs, also built in Australia. The Virginia V is too big for what the Australians need, the Astute class would be ideal in my view, but the Americans wouldn't have this deal just to build British Astute class. I don't see why the Australians would need VLS's, they would need a full on long-range, less crew, hunter-killer. Land attack is less important.

 

[Nilgiri]

Can somebody please enlighten me, why the French proposal would have cost 90 B USD, if it had been materialized?

//edit

I see that @Lonewolf gave some answers but it's hard to believe that the French were willing to share "full TOT"... Are you sure?

The two main drivers for the ridiculous sticker tag/boat were:

A) No cost reduction for SSN related stuff the SSK gets stuck with in final frozen design (i.e everything you need to look at re-designing capex wise versus how much you save opex).

It came about because baracuda is ground up SSN design with lot of stuff locked-in for that realm....and "forced" into being SSK (shortfin)....when an SSK really doesnt need lot of the SSN design premiums (but hey you wanna get back to drawing board on all of it? etc).

B) Aussie insistence on what their shipyard(s) were going to do...and what technologies they wanted transferred for it (incl the needed investments into the capacities and large capital machinery etc).

Divvying up + allocating premium economy of scale (with all the litigation + insurance + IP stuff) like this brings huge projections inevitably....some are realized well, others are frittered away, but it needs commitment to compare relatively with other projects in same multi-decade timespan in end (and we simply dont have the future to analyse).

Canada is currently facing a similar thing with its CSC.

My guess is the Australians will either endup with a American reactor in a British Astute variant design. Built in Australia. Which will be the most capable sub of any Indo-Pacific nation. But it will take 10 years to get into service.

Or a totally new Australia design, which will likely be smaller and less complex than the British and American subs, also built in Australia. The Virginia V is too big for what the Australians need, the Astute class would be ideal in my view, but the Americans wouldn't have this deal just to build British Astute class. I don't see why the Australians would need VLS's, they would need a full on long-range, less crew, hunter-killer. Land attack is less important.

That is if the project even gets a go ahead (it is more likely it ends up being sunk and quick SSK comes around given Aussie entrenched bureaucracy having major anti-nuclear establishment in it that is still not being considered in a large portion of the media releases right now).....

But say if it goes ahead (say a ~ 1/3 chance according to average of 3 naval guys in the know I have now talked with)....it would most likely be an American reactor (or variant thereof)....as the compromise with the anti-nuke establishment will likely exclude the (pretty high ~90%) enrichment ratio the british reactor uses (and current deployed American reactors use as well).

I say that given the British underlying core RnD in the domain is largely stuck to HEU....whereas the US since the 1980s has come up with robust LEU alternatives but just have chosen to forego them as the costs/changes needed in existing naval doctrine, retrofit and convention were deemed too high.

I have an archive of papers related to this I can post regarding this if members request it. Bunch of book volumes are copyrightedpaywalled however....I have to check later what's what....this was years ago.

In fact LEU reactors in submarines are deployed + used only by the French and Chinese AFAIK.

So in that sphere (from aussie point of view where one would assume they prefer LEU over HEU to stay closer to some anti-nuke overall philosophy/inertia)....it again made sense if Aussies just from get go went with a full barracuda SSN with LEU French reactor.

The latter is essentially what Brazil is doing right now with SSN Alvaro Alberto (though it's a one-off).

Anyway that is just some info for people to consider to map out what the avenues here are....and kind of what I find silly with Australia's handling of this overall.

I don't see why the Australians would need VLS's, they would need a full on long-range, less crew, hunter-killer. Land attack is less important.

I agree with this overall. But maybe that's all part of why the closer push to US/UK now. The US and UK can handle the more robust all-rounders in their fleets.... and Australia can maybe develop a next-gen.. "Seawolf" (that US prematurely scrapped).

All depends on how the Admirals et al, work out the coordinated strategy till 2050 and then beyond it.

@Anmdt @Vergennes et al.

 

[mulj]

Desperate times requires desperate measures. USA does not care about this distractions Pacific is their life blood pump and they will not let control of it to anyone.

 

[Gary]

There’s a silver lining for France in the US-Australia submarine deal​

As bad as losing the contract is for Paris, it’s worse for Beijing.

PARIS — The defense technology alliance between Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom is a real blow for France — given Canberra’s decision to cancel a €50 billion submarine deal with the country in favor of American-made nuclear-powered submarines.

But while Paris must seek to limit the damage and prepare for the future — notably by continuing to adapt its strategy in the Indo-Pacific — it would be pointless to add to the crisis by escalating a serious disappointment into a strategic blunder.

To be sure, France’s anger is legitimate. The consequences of the crisis are many.

The collapse of its submarine deal with Australia is an economic blow for the state-owned Naval Group, dozens of subcontractors and local families in Brittany and elsewhere. Diplomatically, it’s also damaging for bilateral relations with Australia and the U.S. And militarily, with French government officials arguing that arms sales are “essential to our sovereignty” because they allow “the viability and independence of our defense industry to be maintained,” the stakes are high.

It’s politically dangerous for French President Emmanuel Macron, who will face attacks regarding his foreign policy as he seeks reelection next year. And it’s a personal disappointment for all those who had worked on the contract since 2014, including Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian.

And yet, it’s important to avoid an overreaction. Undiplomatic statements on social media are counterproductive and could be used against our interests. Having lost the contract of the century, France must make sure it doesn’t lose its credibility and mortgage its future relations.

It’s important, therefore, that Paris do what it can to move on as quickly as possible. The financial untangling is easy: Provisions were made in the bilateral agreement signed in 2019, with the newlyweds already anticipating a potential divorce. The political consequences, and potential benefits requested from France, should be discussed as soon as possible, particularly in terms of the knock-on effects for military cooperation, access to bases in the region and industrial cooperation.

Some might now question France’s Indo-Pacific strategy — presented by Macron in Australia in 2018 — but it’s important to note that French interests in the Indo-Pacific region remain unchanged.

France differs from the other European Union countries because it has sovereignty interests in the region. More than 1.6 million French citizens live in overseas territories there, and three-quarters of the country’s exclusive economic zone — the second largest in the world — is located there as well. France is not a spectator in the Indo-Pacific, it is a resident power.

Because of that, Australia will remain a key partner in the South Pacific. Tensions may spike in the short term, but the strategic partnership between the two countries will endure.

If anything, this crisis should be used as an opportunity to accelerate the necessary adaptation of France’s Indo-Pacific strategy, with the government reassuring its Indian and Japanese strategic partners that its commitment to the region is not in question.

Paris should also redouble its efforts to deepen partnerships and initiatives with actors other than its three strategic partners (India, Australia and Japan), all of whom are members of the Quad format and two of whom are close allies of the U.S. These new partnerships would complement rather than replace the three existing ones. France should replicate the comprehensive maritime dialogue (initiated with Japan in 2019) with other countries. This format is ideal to discuss a large number of issues (economic, security and environmental), while insisting on an inter-ministerial approach that is still too often lacking in most countries.

The government should also strengthen its analytical and anticipatory capabilities in the area. The nuclear crisis with Iran, which obviously still needs to be addressed, is drying up France’s capabilities at a time when the strategic stakes in the Indo-Pacific are becoming ever higher, including when it comes to nuclear proliferation.

Finally, with the publication yesterday of the EU’s first Indo-Pacific strategy, France must continue to integrate a European dimension into its strategy. It must similarly avoid presenting European strategic autonomy — a necessary move — as just a reaction to this crisis, since critics of the concept in the United States and Europe will be anticipating just that.

There’s also a silver lining to this dark cloud. Given Paris’ worries about Beijing’s influence in the region, the government can take comfort in the fact that China is the other big loser in Canberra’s decision.

The regime in Beijing isn’t just worried about the increase in Australia’s military capabilities; it’s also concerned about the precedent the deal creates for other countries that would one day also like to acquire nuclear-powered submarines, such as Canada, Japan or South Korea. For China, the pact between Washington, Canberra and London is the realization of a long-standing fear: the multilateralization of American alliances in the region. Today, it’s Australia and the United Kingdom. Tomorrow, maybe Japan will join.

France might be bearing the cost of the deal, but it should nonetheless be happy about one thing: China’s argument that the U.S. is losing credibility with its allies has just been contradicted in the Indo-Pacific.

Redirecting

 

[Saithan]

I think China is going to be creating a network of sensors, radars and bases as planned and beef up military presence. The AUKUS might be quite slow unless they're able to relocate necessary ressources and vessels to slow down the progress.

I still believe that to strengthen western values would require to actually strengthen the democratic countries in the region such as grant 12 corvette/OPV/LDP to Philippines and help build lasting presence in the west philippine seas

 

[RogerRanger]

I think China is going to be creating a network of sensors, radars and bases as planned and beef up military presence. The AUKUS might be quite slow unless they're able to relocate necessary ressources and vessels to slow down the progress.

I still believe that to strengthen western values would require to actually strengthen the democratic countries in the region such as grant 12 corvette/OPV/LDP to Philippines and help build lasting presence in the west philippine seas

The goal should be to counter China area denial efforts, with your own area denial capabilities. Best area denial naval asset is the submarine. Some brown water SSK's, giving to Viet Nam, Taiwan, Philippines and Malaysia would change the balance of power in the region. The problem is the Americans have no SSK's, the Japanese have Blue water SSK's. So that leaves the German submarines and the Russians. Neither of which the Americans would want exporting to the region. This is a huge export market for any nation which is able to build an export brown water SSK. But nobody is trying to form it. Not the US/France/UK. I would love the UK to open a second sub yard just for SSK's.

 

[Zapper]

Looks like INDIA might try to take some deal forward with french

India is most likely to go with the French option for the P75I project to maintain uniformity and commonality with the recently procured 6 Scorpene subs which have been license-built in Indian shipyards

Also, reports emerged last month that Germany wouldn't bid for the P75I project leaving France, Spain, Russia and SK in the game.


Read more at:
Germany may not bid for P75I Project

We're moving away from inducting anymore Russian platforms and there is no history of procurements from Spain leaving French and SK options.

The French are also pitching a model based on SMX 3.0 submarine for P75I which is a new design and is said to be a hybrid of Scorpene and Shortfin

With SMX 3.0, Naval Group pulls out all stops to win in India

 

[Glass🚬]

France sees "crisis" over submarine cancellation - Le Drian​

Reuters

French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian speaks during a city tour with German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas and Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs Zbigniew Rau to mark the 30th anniversary of the "Weimar Triangle" in Weimar, Germany September 10, 2021. Jens Schlueter/Pool via REUTERS
PARIS, Sept 18 (Reuters) - France is in a "crisis" with the United States and Australia after Canberra's cancellation of a multi-billion dollar submarine order led Paris to recall envoys from its allies, French Foreign Affairs Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said.
France said on Friday it was recalling its ambassadors from Washington and Canberra over a trilateral security deal also involving Britain which sank the submarine contract with Paris. read more
"The fact that, for the first time in the history of relations between the United States and France, we are recalling our ambassador for consultations is a grave political act that shows the intensity of the crisis today between our two countries and also with Australia," Le Drian told France 2 television.
"There has been duplicity, contempt and lies - you can't play that way in an alliance," he added.

Canberra announced on Thursday it would scrap its 2016 deal with France's Naval Group to build a fleet of conventional submarines and instead build at least eight nuclear-powered ones with U.S. and British technology after striking a trilateral security pact.
Le Drian said French President Emmanuel Macron had not spoken with U.S. President Joe Biden about the submarine issue.
The minister again drew a parallel between the U.S. president's action and the unpredictable style of his predecessor Donald Trump, adding that Biden had acted "without the tweets but with a sort of solemn announcement that is rather unbearable".
Le Drian also repeated criticism of what Paris sees as opportunism from former European Union member Britain in joining forces with Washington and Canberra, calling London "the spare tyre" of the initiative.

France sees "crisis" over submarine cancellation - Le Drian

France is in a "crisis" with the United States and Australia after Canberra's cancellation of a multi-billion dollar submarine order led Paris to recall envoys from its allies, French Foreign Affairs Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said.

www.reuters.com

 

[RogerRanger]

France sees "crisis" over submarine cancellation - Le Drian​

Reuters

French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian speaks during a city tour with German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas and Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs Zbigniew Rau to mark the 30th anniversary of the "Weimar Triangle" in Weimar, Germany September 10, 2021. Jens Schlueter/Pool via REUTERS
PARIS, Sept 18 (Reuters) - France is in a "crisis" with the United States and Australia after Canberra's cancellation of a multi-billion dollar submarine order led Paris to recall envoys from its allies, French Foreign Affairs Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said.
France said on Friday it was recalling its ambassadors from Washington and Canberra over a trilateral security deal also involving Britain which sank the submarine contract with Paris. read more
"The fact that, for the first time in the history of relations between the United States and France, we are recalling our ambassador for consultations is a grave political act that shows the intensity of the crisis today between our two countries and also with Australia," Le Drian told France 2 television.
"There has been duplicity, contempt and lies - you can't play that way in an alliance," he added.

Canberra announced on Thursday it would scrap its 2016 deal with France's Naval Group to build a fleet of conventional submarines and instead build at least eight nuclear-powered ones with U.S. and British technology after striking a trilateral security pact.
Le Drian said French President Emmanuel Macron had not spoken with U.S. President Joe Biden about the submarine issue.
The minister again drew a parallel between the U.S. president's action and the unpredictable style of his predecessor Donald Trump, adding that Biden had acted "without the tweets but with a sort of solemn announcement that is rather unbearable".
Le Drian also repeated criticism of what Paris sees as opportunism from former European Union member Britain in joining forces with Washington and Canberra, calling London "the spare tyre" of the initiative.

France sees "crisis" over submarine cancellation - Le Drian

France is in a "crisis" with the United States and Australia after Canberra's cancellation of a multi-billion dollar submarine order led Paris to recall envoys from its allies, French Foreign Affairs Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said.

www.reuters.com

Do you have any idea why the French aren't really targeting the British?