Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36093628)

So we upset the French ... we care why exactly ?

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36093631)

Well a cynical mind might think they could try to retaliate against the U.K. by other methods. One possible method could be with the French governments interests in Renault which has a subsequent controlling interest in Nissan

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36093631)

Well a cynical mind might think they could try to retaliate against the U.K. by other methods. One possible method could be with the French governments interests in Renault which has a subsequent controlling interest in Nissan

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36093685)

That’s fanciful. And despite what they’ve been saying to their own voters over the weekend, French politicians aren’t going to escalate a diplomatic war with us because we, unlike Australia and the US, are their next door neighbour and they can’t afford the outright havoc that would cause.

Meanwhile, HMG is suggesting that there could be work in it for British shipyards. No detail on what, but it sounds like they’ll be pushing the Australians to buy additional equipment and maybe support vessels from us.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58613195

Eventually I suspect specialists from our own RN will be involved in training the Aussies on the operation of long-duration sub missions.

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36093631)

Well a cynical mind might think they could try to retaliate against the U.K. by other methods. One possible method could be with the French governments interests in Renault which has a subsequent controlling interest in Nissan

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36093708)

Of maybe Aukus was our cynical attempt to pay Macron back for the Brexit difficulties he is causing us.

Sooner or later, France will see that it’s better to be friends with us than be our enemy. Hopefully, cool heads and common sense will prevail.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36093710)

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36093711)

Macron is a dead man walking, electorally speaking.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36093707)

Interesting view in the Times today about why France was less harsh towards the U.K. on this matter.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/s...efd4159d3e470c

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36093711)

Macron is a dead man walking, electorally speaking.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36093712)

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36093483)

Perhaps it’s a further case in point: that when it comes to it, France needs to keep Britain close more than it needs to prove a diplomatic point. Funny, that.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36093543)

Indeed.

However it’s important not to get hung up on the who said what and who’s right or wrong in this case - this really isn’t a story of a supplier/customer relationship breakdown. There has been political pressure in Australia for its navy to access nuclear sub technology for some time now, because it is very obvious the strategic naval threat comes from China which has nuclear subs. You can’t effectively counter a sub that can remain underwater for 3 months with one that can barely manage 3 weeks. The wrangling over the Australian-French contract will be an interesting sideshow but arguments over who said what to who shouldn’t cloud the important fact, which is that Australia suddenly has a way to acquire and control technology that 5 years ago it simply didn’t think it could get access to.

As far as I can see, the Oz Admiralty never looked too seriously at procuring a nuclear fleet when they were in the market for new boats prior to 2016. That could have been due to cost but it is more likely something to do with technology transfer. You don’t have sovereign control over your subs if you have to return them to the country of manufacture every time they need service or repair. We know that the defunct French deal mandated a great deal of component manufacturing to take place in Australia. There’s no doubt Australia could have maintained its French diesel-electric subs in its own yards, especially if the critical components could be manufactured locally. I strongly suspect that in 2016 nobody was prepared to sign a technology transfer deal with Australia that would allow them to fully maintain nuclear subs domestically. (Just such a deal was signed between Britain and the US before we finally committed to buy the F-35, allowing us to do all maintenance and repair domestically, even on the most sensitive aspects of its systems).

There is now a compelling strategic case for Australia to have access to this technology that Britain has made to the US and the US has agreed to. For Australia to be able to assemble US-designed nuclear subs in Australian yards means they have signed a tech transfer agreement, which is no small matter (the F-35 deal was held up for months by Congressional demands for some extremely detailed assurances about our ability to guard American military secrets).

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36093719)

Yup … in so many words, this is the position expressed by HMG - the UK and France rely on each other and we can’t afford to fall out. So the French will do nothing because there’s nothing they can do, then tell their electorate they’re doing nothing because we’re not important enough.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 36093919)

Perhaps or perhaps it's a sign of our standing in the world at the moment



This compelling strategic case isn't a pressing concern though, iirc these boats won't be ready till 2040 so providing the Chinese don't try anything till then all will be well.

---------- Post added at 14:38 ---------- Previous post was at 14:31 ----------



They could tell pretti Patel to stick the migrant deal and even more actively help them across the water, might not be a bad thing if they did tbh, at least then the pretense would be removed

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36093711)

Macron is a dead man walking, electorally speaking.