5 ms·

Aukus: French president says Australian PM lied over submarine deal

11 points by 1cvmask 5y ago

FridayoLeary 5y ago
It's not like the French have never lied to anyone. It is funny to see how the us uk and au all conspired, with a straight face to screw over France, I didn't think these things still happened. I wonder what the UK gets out of this, beyond membership in the big boys club.
- dirtyid 5y ago
  >I wonder what the UK gets out of this Just money. Pending on how much they can screw Australia out of local construction. AU barely had expertise for Collins class, pretty much no chance they can build indigenous industry for nuke subs. UK only country with free shipyard space AND license for US nuke tech.
neximo64 5y ago
Should just give up, at $90bn each sub costs almost 2x France's most expensive subs and then it's diesel. France just looks really weak the way they've handled it.
- 1cvmask 5y ago
  According to the article the French subs were roughly each a little over $3 billion each. But in another source it is $90 billion for 12 French diesel boats and $3.45 billion US dollars for each Virginia class nuclear powered submarine. From the article in the headline: Mr Macron was furious after Australia cancelled a $37bn (£27bn) deal to build 12 submarines From another source: https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/how-much-nuclear-submarine-cost-022130602.html https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/how-much-nuclear-submarine...
  - neximo64 5y ago
    The $90bn number is $7.5bn each for each conventional disel sub with a prop jet. The French 'triomphant' class is second only in cost behind the Seawolf class at about $3-4bn (USD). And this is still above the Seawolf (both nuclear subs). Yet this $7.5bn sub is Diesel (AUD) and inferior in design to the Seawolf/Jimmy Carter/Connecticut subs. The original number $50bn (£27bn) was increased to $90bn because there were cost increases related to being built in Australia and having more local origin requirements. (Actually goes up to $140bn after maintenance). The headlines always play between the two numbers (and sometimes 3). France is seriously taking the piss I mean, do they seriously expect to be paid $7.5bn for each sub when they have better designs theyve built for less. On the issue of transparency in losing the contract, it was also stolen from the Japanese a few years ago.
1cvmask 5y ago
It's funny how the US sanctions countries who buy arms from the second biggest supplier Russia but France even with the EU has no courage to bully and sanction small Australia: Heft really does matter when you want to sanction and bully countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countering_America%27s_Adversaries_Through_Sanctions_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countering_America%27s_Adversa...
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  Sanctions? For a contract dispute? I'm sure the EU's other member countries don't want to be dragged into that just for France's military industry and its government losing face. That's the kind of pettiness expected of communist China, but Australia imports 2x what they export to the EU. I can't possibly see what sanctions would win in the long term, except damage to their reputation as a fair and trustworthy trade partner. The reason why France is making so much noise about this is probably because their arms industry does not have legal options to get satisfaction so they're pressuring the government. If they are so unhappy about it they should have negotiated a contract with stronger penalties. It's really pretty difficult to feel sorry for war profiteers who are upset that they don't get to fleece regular plebs out of of quite enough of their own money. And pretty difficult to feel sorry for notoriously France-first-and-f-the-rest France either. There's more than a few people in the antipodes who remember Operation Satanic, Mururoa, etc.
  - WastingMyTime89 5y ago
    > The reason why France is making so much noise about this is probably because their arms industry does not have legal options to get satisfaction so they're pressuring the government. The French arm industry is part of the government. It was somewhat privatised during the past thirty years but most of it is still majority state owned. This is not the USA. France uses foreign sales to fund its sovereign defence programs. If some people are getting rich in the way, they are very few. This is entirely a strategic and diplomatic issue not an economic one.
    - throwawaylinux 5y ago
Perenti 5y ago
The Australian PM is only lying when his lips are moving. Before politics, he was known as "Scotty from Marketing", and that's how he operates, like a dodgy secondhand car salesman. And he loves coal.
InTheArena 5y ago
France throwing shade at everyone else, on a contract that they were Way over budget on, had cancellation language that they knew was a issue, and we’re using a cornerstone of their china policy is breathtaking. Marcon is using the same trick that every single petty dictator of the last hundred years has used. If something is screwed up domestically or you have a election coming up, blame the United States.

11 points by 1cvmask 5y ago

It's not like the French have never lied to anyone. It is funny to see how the us uk and au all conspired, with a straight face to screw over France, I didn't think these things still happened. I wonder what the UK gets out of this, beyond membership in the big boys club.

dirtyid 5y ago
>I wonder what the UK gets out of this Just money. Pending on how much they can screw Australia out of local construction. AU barely had expertise for Collins class, pretty much no chance they can build indigenous industry for nuke subs. UK only country with free shipyard space AND license for US nuke tech.

neximo64 5y ago

Should just give up, at $90bn each sub costs almost 2x France's most expensive subs and then it's diesel. France just looks really weak the way they've handled it.

1cvmask 5y ago
According to the article the French subs were roughly each a little over $3 billion each. But in another source it is $90 billion for 12 French diesel boats and $3.45 billion US dollars for each Virginia class nuclear powered submarine. From the article in the headline: Mr Macron was furious after Australia cancelled a $37bn (£27bn) deal to build 12 submarines From another source: https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/how-much-nuclear-submarine-cost-022130602.html https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/how-much-nuclear-submarine...
- neximo64 5y ago
  The $90bn number is $7.5bn each for each conventional disel sub with a prop jet. The French 'triomphant' class is second only in cost behind the Seawolf class at about $3-4bn (USD). And this is still above the Seawolf (both nuclear subs). Yet this $7.5bn sub is Diesel (AUD) and inferior in design to the Seawolf/Jimmy Carter/Connecticut subs. The original number $50bn (£27bn) was increased to $90bn because there were cost increases related to being built in Australia and having more local origin requirements. (Actually goes up to $140bn after maintenance). The headlines always play between the two numbers (and sometimes 3). France is seriously taking the piss I mean, do they seriously expect to be paid $7.5bn for each sub when they have better designs theyve built for less. On the issue of transparency in losing the contract, it was also stolen from the Japanese a few years ago.

1cvmask 5y ago

It's funny how the US sanctions countries who buy arms from the second biggest supplier Russia but France even with the EU has no courage to bully and sanction small Australia: Heft really does matter when you want to sanction and bully countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countering_America%27s_Adversaries_Through_Sanctions_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countering_America%27s_Adversa...

throwawaylinux 5y ago
Sanctions? For a contract dispute? I'm sure the EU's other member countries don't want to be dragged into that just for France's military industry and its government losing face. That's the kind of pettiness expected of communist China, but Australia imports 2x what they export to the EU. I can't possibly see what sanctions would win in the long term, except damage to their reputation as a fair and trustworthy trade partner. The reason why France is making so much noise about this is probably because their arms industry does not have legal options to get satisfaction so they're pressuring the government. If they are so unhappy about it they should have negotiated a contract with stronger penalties. It's really pretty difficult to feel sorry for war profiteers who are upset that they don't get to fleece regular plebs out of of quite enough of their own money. And pretty difficult to feel sorry for notoriously France-first-and-f-the-rest France either. There's more than a few people in the antipodes who remember Operation Satanic, Mururoa, etc.
- WastingMyTime89 5y ago
  > The reason why France is making so much noise about this is probably because their arms industry does not have legal options to get satisfaction so they're pressuring the government. The French arm industry is part of the government. It was somewhat privatised during the past thirty years but most of it is still majority state owned. This is not the USA. France uses foreign sales to fund its sovereign defence programs. If some people are getting rich in the way, they are very few. This is entirely a strategic and diplomatic issue not an economic one.
  - throwawaylinux 5y ago

Perenti 5y ago

The Australian PM is only lying when his lips are moving. Before politics, he was known as "Scotty from Marketing", and that's how he operates, like a dodgy secondhand car salesman. And he loves coal.

InTheArena 5y ago

France throwing shade at everyone else, on a contract that they were Way over budget on, had cancellation language that they knew was a issue, and we’re using a cornerstone of their china policy is breathtaking. Marcon is using the same trick that every single petty dictator of the last hundred years has used. If something is screwed up domestically or you have a election coming up, blame the United States.